Close To Torah

This parshah captures the remaining three makos that are to be afflicted upon the people of Egypt. Having already dispensed the nine makos the still stubborn Pharoh is given warning of the final makah that will be administered. The Torah then says that yet again Pharoh refuses to free the people of Yisroel. The next parshah written in the Torah is the famous “החדש הזה לכם”, or “this month will be for them”. As is known by many Chazal tell us that really the Torah could have began from this very pasuk. This pasuk is the true beginning of the people of Yisroel and their relationship to HaKadosh Boruch Hu. It is interesting to note that this parshah is found right in the middle of the final makah, before the actual makah is carried out. The mitzvah of Kiddish HaChodesh is the beginning of this binding relationship between Yisroel and Hashem. The outline of the mitzvah of the Korban Pesach is found directly following the mitzvah of Kiddish HaChodesh, it is unquestionably connected. Following the detail of the Korbon Pesach and some obligations to be carried out on Pesach as well, comes the final makah, makas b’choros. Up until the seventh aliyah the Torah discusses the beginning of the long awaited Yitzias Mitzrayim. Except for the point of difficulty that I already mentioned regarding the seemingly awkward break between the warning of the makah and its carrying out I understand the flow of the parshiyos. Comes the seventh aliyah and I am lost.

The seventh aliyah begins with the mitzvah of Kedushas B’chor. We then find the Torah going back to further discuss the mitzvos of Pesach, with the addition of the mitzvah of Sipur Yitzias Mitzrayim. Following that the Torah discusses the mitzvah of Tefillin then reverts to discussing the mitzvah of Kedushas B’chor. Then the Torah goes back to discussing Sipur Yitzias Mitzrayim and finally ending with Tefillin. This back and forth is of course precise and the best way to bring out the points mentioned. We must remember that if the Torah wanted to write these pasukim in a straight flowing fashion it could  have. The reason that these different ideas are placed next to each other must of course be to teach something about each one of them. B’ezras Hashem we will look into these pasukim and try to clarify some of the mysteries that lye below them.

As for the first question we asked in regards to the seeming interruption between the warning of the makah achronah and its execution. The Torah discusses the mitzvah of Kiddish HaChodesh which leads into the laws of Pesach. There is a direct connection between the concept of B’chor and Kiddish HaChodesh. The B’chor is the first of the children that are born. The B’chor is of course the argument found between Yaakov and Esav. It is also found between the shvutim, as Yosef is regarded as b’chor. The b’chor is the legacy of the family, he is destined with continuing the name of the family. Through the act of murdering the b’chor the legacy of the family is also destroyed. The first fruit is always the most dear. That is possibly why Hashem opened the rechem of Leah in order that she be deemed the bearer of the b’chor. The idea of Kiddish HaChodesh is that it is also the first of the year and the first of the months. The difference is that we determine the chodesh. The chodesh is the bechinah of Olam L’matah, b’chor is the bechinah of Olam Ha’elyon. We declare the kedushah of the chodesh and infuse it with kedushah. The b’chor is born kadosh and we simply declare its nature of kedushah. I have not yet discussed the parallel between makas b’choros and the mitzvah of Kedushas B’chor, that is in the second answer. The point I want to bring out here is that the makah of b’chor is complete nullification of all that you have been given.

Says the pasuk, “ויהי כי הקשה פרעה לשלחנו ויהרג ה’ כל בכור בארץ מצרים מבכר אדם ועד בכור בהמה על כן אני זבח לה’ כל פטר רחם הזכרים וכל בכור בני אפדה”(Shemos 13, 15-16). What is the reason that we keep the Kedushas B’chor, because Hashem killed all of the b’chorim in the land of Egypt. It seems to be the fact that the b’chorei mitzrayim were all killed that we have such an obligation. Perhaps the emphasis of the pasuk is the other way around, it is because Hashem killed the b’chorim therefore we have b’chor. At first I wanted to say that the emphasis was on the fact that Hashem hardened the heart of Pharoh. Why would that make a difference? I would suggest that it was due to our needs that the b’chorim had to be killed as they provided the necessary lessons of Imunah that we needed. It is a nice thought but it is difficult to say that would be the sole reason for the mizvah of b’chor. All the faculties of the world are here for us to worship Hashem properly, it is a zchus to have such a purpose,  not the opposite. I would like to suggest another understanding of the pasuk. This will explain the connection between Tefillin and b’chor.

The nature of Tefillin is that they are a sign of rememberance. The ose that they contain binds us both through our minds ands our hands. An attribute of the tefillin is that they are to be placed in between the eyes. Our eyes are the tool that enables us to direct ourselves. Every single magnificent detail of the body is for a purpose both practicaly and in their representation as well. Practically speaking, if you try to walk in a straight line and turn your head you will find yourself drifting off the path. The nature of man is that he walks in the direction that he faces. The place in between our eyes is what we define as the central path. The path in which we aspire to go is the one that we face. When we put the tefillin in between our eyes we are placing the will of Hashem ahead of us guiding our path. This is also the nature of the tefillin shel yad, as it binds our actions to be under the guidance of Torah. We see that the tefillin are there to impose a control on our physical and metaphysical life. We also find that they are supposed to provide a reminder to the miracles of yitzias mitzrayim and all of its wonder. The way the tefillin acheive this in addition to being our central focus point of life they also provide us with a constant connection to kedushah. As the pasuk says that the tefillin will be למען תהיה תורת ה’ בפיך, that means that the tefillin will provide you with Torah constantly. Most specifically it will be in your mouth. I asked my Rebbi, Rav Nochum Lansky Shlit”a if that meant that through the ose of the tefillin will be zoceh to constantly having Torah in our mouths? Meaning to say that through the reminder of the tefillin we will become involved in the study of Torah. Rebbi responded that it is more than that – tefillin provide Torah in your mouth! That means that tefillin which is an ose is the words of Torah in your mouth, meaning it brings the ose of the shel rosh and transforms it to the level of speech which is found in Torah. It is interesting to note that the language ose is found by the shel yad and zikarone is found by the shel rosh, where the ose that is added on the outside of the tefillin is found on the shel rosh not the shel yad. This idea of tefillin bringing the connection of the tefillin to a level of speech is very much connected to the chag of Pesach and of course to b’chor.

It is well known that the Arizal says that the word Pesach can also be broken up as the words Peh Sach (פה סח). This idea is found throughout the chag of Pesach, the idea of speech. This concept is also found by the seder with the mitzvos of sippur and hagadah. As I already explained this is found in the tefillin as well. Lastly, this is found in regards to b’chor. The b’chor is born kudosh but there is an obligation to either redeem it or bring it to the mizbeach (Depending on which type of b’chor.) It is clear to me that by b’chor adam is redeemed by five slayim, which is connected to the Five Books of the Torah. The redemption of the b’chor adam is in order that he may be able to do mundane actions, otherwise he would be kudosh. The b’chor behaymah is born kudosh but you still must declare its kedushah prior to it being brought to the mitzbeach, that is the idea of speech found by b’chor. The idea of the five slayim by the b’chor adom is the idea of tefillin being a constant connection. We take the kedushah which could have been given to work only for kedushah in exchange for the attempt to bring ourselves to kedushah. The idea of Kiddish HaChodesh was explained to be the power of the Olam L’Mata which is the strength of Oral Torah. This is why the b’chor adom is redeemed with five slayim because he is being brought into a world where we decide upon the kedushah. The outcome of our actions is revealed in the kedushah that we reveal to ourselves and the world.

There is much more of this topic to discuss but it really past the scope of this parshah. I want to conclude by saying over what I heard from my Rebbi that the gematria of אדם בהמה is the same as זמן. That is the idea that tikkun of behaymuh is through time, meaning that through time we may be able to fix the nature of Man and rid him of his animal-like natures. That is through the toil of Torah and a strong observance of Mitzvos. Through placing the tefillin in between your eyes, where you can direct your life. With the learning of Torah every moment you have as that is your life. Through the realization that the whole yitzias mitzrayim was in order for us to keep the Torah today. The idea of time is to change. That means the Torah is only acquired through change. Change of yourself and of your actions. Through the binding of your actions to the yoke of the Torah. We will all be merited to bring in Mashiach tomorrow. The chance is before us, we need to grab it and change from chol to kedushah!

Just some ha’uros on the parshah as I quickly read through. When I learn like this the style is usually kfeching the simple meaning of the words against the words of Chazal. Meaning to say even though I know the truth of the Torah, none the less I still need try to understand how Chazal came to their conclusion. Of course within the many punim of Torah there is no limit to the ways to explain a pasuk, none the less I would first like to understand the great understanding of Chazal first.

Almost right in the beginning of the parshah the pasuk says “וימת יוסף”, “Yosef perished”. It is quite troublesome to state this when the Torah just recorded this with the last pasuk in sefer Brayshis. Even if the pasukim were further away the question would still trouble me. Being that the pasukim are so close it only makes the question stronger. You can ask that it shouldn’t make the question stronger because this is a new sefer. True, but there is still a recollection of the first sefer. I think that the answer is that the first death was that of the Avos. Yosef was somewhere in between an av and one of the shevatim,^[1] by his death the era of the Avos also concludes. By beginning shemos with the leaving of Egypt and the passing of Yosef we are linking the two. The truth is we need to lo ok in to the leaving of Egypt first. It is a worthy observation that as the pasuk states there were seventy people who left. In saying so the pasuk adds on by saying “כל נפש”. Why say kol, which always comes to add to something? The end of the pasuk states that Yosef was in Egypt. Then we have the pasuk that says Yosef passed away. What a weird way to write that! First Torah accounts for all those who left Egypt, that is all seventy people and Yosef was in Egypt. Then say Yosef died and all his brothers and his entire era. Perhaps we need to look back and think a little bit. The reason why Yosef came to Egypt was due to his brother’s actions. It is therefore understandable to say that they are also responsible for Yosef having lived in Egypt. It is as if not only did the brothers cause the slavery in Egypt but also prevented Yosef from leaving Egypt. Yosef being the continuation of Yaakov, was unable to continue in his path. For he was left in to stay in Egypt. Due to their actions they caused Yosef to die in Egypt. Such a death also led to their death and all of their generation. It isn’t by rote that the pasuk lists the deaths of Yosef and then his brothers. This was the result of their actions that Yosef was destined to die and not be able to continue out of Egypt.

The Throwing Of the Males

The pasuk state that Paroh obligated the people of Yisroel to throw their newborn Male children into the יאור, or ya’or this body of water was the main sustenence for the people of Egypt. Isn’t it odd that the thing that personifies the source of nourishment be that which was used to exterminate these newborns!? It is of course also found in the dream of Paroh in the beginning of Parshas Miketz it is interesting that both of the cows come from the ya’or. Perhaps this can be explained from the yesod of the Arizal, he says that מצרים is also the word מיצר ים which a I have previously discussed is the greatest compression of physicality that we see. This nature of existence is given to the people of Egypt. As my great Rebbe Rav Nochum Lansky Shlit”a always says that it is seen in the names of all of the rulers they all have to do with physicality.

If you look at the word of מזונונות, Mezonos which means sustenance its root is זן. That is also the same letters as the root of the word זנות, Znus, which means illicit relations. This is most likely the exact opposite of sustenance. Things that sustain a person is not for the mere taste or enjoyment, but to satiate a person and allow them to function. Znus is the pure lust for endless pleasures. This is Egypt. Egypt is the source of all of the exiles that the People of Yisroel experience until today. Their basis of existence is a culture of pleasure and physical indulgence. This is also seen in the Mummification process that they do to all their dead. They believe so strongly in the importance of physicality that it should be preserved even after death.

There is a discussion in the Midrash what does the pasuk mean when it says ותרא אתו כי טוב ההוא, one opinion that of R’Meir says that Tov or good was his name. Another opinion sugest that he was נולד שכהוא מהול, which means he was born circumcised. Finally another opinion, that of the Rabanan states that when he was born נתמלא כל הבית כלו אורה, the entire house filled with light. An amazing thing, all of them. The first suggest that he himself was Tov. The Zohar says on that opinion that in fact his tov is the same as the tov of Brias HaOlam.

The Torah writes that Yocheved was able to hide Moshe for three months but no more. Says Rabbeinu Bachyah that the day of the conclusion of the three months was Shavuos Says the Zohar on the account of the תבת גומא that it is hinting to the ארון that will carry the sacred luchos habris. Says the Zohar that just like the tayvuh was constructed with soft inside and a tought outside so too was the Torah it containing both the positive commandments and the negative commandments as wlell. It is my opinion that the positive commandments represents the the inside of the taivuh and the negative mitzvos representing the outside of the tayvuh. It is the positive mitzvos which are to bring further ahavah to Hashem that is an internal closeness. it is that of the negative commandments which represents the outer shell, that which protects the Torah and its values.

Moshe Rabbeinu who personifies that of the Written Torah as opposed to his brother Aharon who represents the Oral Law. That is why of course Moshe was born circumcised but at the same time was unable of properly speaking with his mouth. The bris milah is of course the words millah which literally means a word, that is the connection as is well known between the bris of the mouth and the milah.

The Males of the nation of Yisroel are being tossed in to the ya’or. It is Moshe who is sailed down the same place. It is perhaps the aspect of the aron that is the vessel that carries Moshe. The din is that all that carry the aron are carried. Perhaps through the ya’or and its journey Moshe and the aron was rescuing the helpless children as his beginning of opposition to the rule of the Paroh. Even in a infantile state Moshe was destined to redeem the People of Yisroel, and so he did.

We are not all Moshe, that is clear. Know that we all have a capacity to redeem the People of Yisroel. Not only do we have such a capability but it is our responsibility to do so. We should are be privileged with the assistance of Hashem constantly to realize our strengths. To find the place that we fit in where no one else does. Take that and run with it! It is all up to us, let’s go!

He Was Good

As I already mentioned the pasuk calls Moshe tov. The Gr”a says that if you take the words of the Shema, there are five words before the word echad. There are six words following the word echad. Those five words represent the Five Books of Moshe, and the six represent the six orders of the Mishnah. Rebbe Akiva who passed away saying the word echad of the Shema shows that he is the one that connects these two entities together. As my great Rebbe Rav Nochum Lansky Shlit”a puts it he is the av of Torah Shel Ba’al Peh. I wanted to add that we see that Moshe is called tov, which is gematriah echad. That means that even though Moshe is Netzach which is the written code, and he is still the source of the oral law. That goes well with the opinion that tov means that Moshe was born circumcised, because he was without a blemish in his bris but he was incapable of clear speech, further personifying the attribute of the written code.

1. Look in the Prushus D’Rachim for further deatil about this thought. [↩]

The Lion is deemed the King of its environment as it is a predator and not preyed upon. Wearing its mane, the Lion roams about in packs at the top of its food chain while depending upon the other animals for sustenance. A Lion may seem like a King however there is one drastic difference the Lion’s niche is innate; no thirst for power leads to this royal stature, rather the natural instincts that it was born with. A Human King may wear a crown and often born into royalty but the entire makeup of his kingship differs. The Lion is born a King and lives according to his instincts; however the King lives according to his instincts to live like a King. This facile difference is the major gap between Mankind and Beast.

Desire is the yearning that fuels a Human as opposed to a Beast. A Beast only has desires of bodily needs; the essential factors that it survives upon are hunted for and once acquired the Beast ceases. In some rare cases a Beast will take more than it needs; in such a scenario that Beast will take until it has reason not to which is based upon its other instincts such as stomach pain from gluttony. A Beast is born with a desire to have relations, it may not have any understanding that a offspring will result from it rather just as it is hungry it will eat so to by procreation. Only the Human has desires that extend past its bodily needs. A Human will die if it does not appease that which its body needs, however Man has the ability to overturn his desires and refrain from them. This ability is the force that drives Man to whatever undertaking it desires; this being the premise to Man and the lust for his crown.

Man and his desire coupled with a society will shape that which it needs to the extent that it may precede his true necessities. This corresponds with the idea that Man is able to actively destroy himself; it is obvious that his desires are unique within a scope of great variance there may be some constant factors. This consistency is often shaped by society rather more specifically shaped according to his ambitions are. This concept may be represented by the King’s Crown.

The realization that society is the greatest influence on ones desires is not absolute. If that is true theoretically if a Man were secluded from birth in a habitat in which he could self-sustain himself. It is likely that he would live a life like a Beast. If he never knew of any means of communication, or any other Humans he would probably be content with what he had. He would entertain himself and live according to the true innate instincts. One is not able to comprehend that which he is not introduced to. In this case this Man would never desire to eat a food that he has not been introduced to, rather he may stumble upon the idea that there are other foods and would want to eat them. However, if he was secluded on an Island he has never seen anything past it so he may desire to know what else exists but that is all. Unless he knows that something exists he cannot yearn for it. The exception to that may be companionship. It is probable that the desire of the opposite gender is an innate desire. The composition of that individual; physical, emotional and other aspects of a person are greatly subjective and therefore are not completely innate. Though since Man knows he exists, just like he can long for the knowledge of other foods he may long for the existence of the Humans. The desire to reproduce and the lack of knowledge of any other Human would most likely leave him depressed and eventually suicidal. The other innate desires he is capable of suppressing but the constant seeking is enough to destroy someone.

This desire of reproduction is related to the desire to communicate. Had there been to urge to reproduce an Animal would not do so. The world was created in such a way that Man and Beast needs to reproduce which is obvious. The less obvious idea is the need to communicate. There is no doubt that the idea of reproduction is not just a means of ensuring the populous rather Mans personal sense of internal growth. The converse of the feeling of lacking is not full rather complete. The feeling of lacking is that there is a longing for something that one cannot explain and everything becomes numb to suppress this longing. The relationship of two counterparts is a physical and mental need that is innate. The presence of that other person provides the missing piece to the puzzle of his longing. In reality this relationship is a means of growing attached both physically and mentally and becoming dependent upon each other. Over time the outcome is that the two fuse to a complete entity that complements each other.

On the metaphysical level the two people together provide corresponding personality traits that are befitting to the others development in maturing each other together. In addition to the innate desires Man is born with, he is also born with a personality. A personality is an obscure word that describes the pitch of ones means of communicating and co-existing with others. If our theoretical man on the island were to stub his toe he would feel pain and may cry and scream but through time he will stop as the nerves in his toe stop expressing to the nervous system that there is pain. If he constantly feels this pain like constantly being pricked with a sharp object he will at first not be able to bear the pain but eventually he can overcome the pain. He will continue to feel the pain but his tolerance to how much pain will bother him will decrease. The same is true by one’s personality. If a person have a roaring temper but received a prick from a sharp object he could either learn to deal with the pain or control his temper. This pricking is a resultant of companionship for the most part but also by general society. In order to coexist with other either one is pricked and learns to control himself or learns to tolerate the pricking.

This second option where a person would cease to control himself even if he is pressured to stop is the concept of argument. An argument is when the opposing sides refuse to agree. Peace is not the absence of different sides rather the ability to tolerate the other sides. That may mean adjusting aspects on each of the opposing sides and maybe even seceding. The desire that was mentioned earlier is what causes disharmony. When one desires something that cannot coexist with the other that desire has the power to occupy ones life leaving everything else behind.

The power that society can have is to dictate the guidelines of what is desired. The need longing to coexist with other will fuel the person to want to meet to those guidelines.

It is the eternal mark that we leave in this world that is of the highest regard. Our actions that we do now can plant seeds in the ground to root the essential faculties of Life in the future generations. Not only do those actions establish a future they make the past worthwhile. The now of tomorrow is in our hands, we must protect it from harm. Eventually the time comes when we must pass on this great responsibility and take a step back as our sprouting jewels shine brightly. Such a time is difficult to acclimate to but fear not it shall pass. Our great Father Yaakov expresses this emotion very clearly in the onset of our parshah. As the great commentator the Baal HaTurim notes that the word ויחי is the gematriah thirty-four. Those thirty-four years are the sum total of the years of pleasantry that composed Yaakov‘s life. His life, as the Baal HaTurim concludes was full of pain and sadness for the remainder of his years. It was only the presence of Yosef his son that enabled him to have those years of great happiness. What was it that was so strong about this bond between father and son that made it as though those years were not even lived? It is without question that Yaakov saw that the future was dependant upon Yosef who was in all respects an extension of himself. As the pasuk notes in the previous parshah Yosef is in fact the Toldah of Yaakov^[1] .

What is the vital task that Yaakov requests of Yosef in his last days? It is to ensure him that he will have a proper burial. Note the language of his request, as it is written in the negative. Further on in the parshah Yaakov makes a request to all of his children that they bury him in the place that the rest of his holy family lay, Maaras HaMachpaylah. Being that so why must Yaakov make a special request to Yosef to ensure him that he will not be buried in the Land of Egypt? It is of course not superfluous by any means. There can be several explanations to this question one of which I want to focus upon. There must be something that is inherit about Egypt that brought about such a request. It is of course unlikely that simply speaking Yaakov wanted to be buried in a single location, as he could have directly said that. Yaakov is requesting that his son Yosef ensure him that all that he had worked for in this world not remain here in the Land of Egypt.

Egypt or Mitzrayim is the total antithesis to the Jewish People. As is articulated from the word itself Mitzrayim is a branch of the word Matzar or a strait that is the compression of all physicality. That is seen from the names of the nobleman as they are all associated with aspects of agriculture and the like. The society of Mitzrayim in all fashions is source of the opposition to the Jewish People. There are of course four exiles, but the original exile was from Mitzrayim. Had the sin of Golden Calf not occured we would have gone right into Eretz Yisroel and not had to wander. So too had the sale of Yosef never occurred there would not have been the slavery of Mitzrayim. The actions of the Jewish People as a whole are heavily rooted by the actions of Yosef and his brothers.

It is noted throughout the words of Chazal that the death of Yaakov is in fact not mentioned in the Torah. In fact the Torah even when recording his years states that he is approaching them not reaching them. In the gemarah where this dialog occurs the discussion is preceded by a rather puzzling one. The gemara^[2] states that two amoraim R’Yitzchak and R’Nachmun were eating. One says to the other a statement of R’Yochanan, don’t speak while eating a meal in the event that you may swallow your food and cause it to enter the windpipe causing in suffocation. Following this gemarah after they completed eating one said to the other in the name of R’Yochanan that Yaakov Avinu never died. Rashi says on the spot, that means he lives forever. A puzzling statement on its own right, but even more puzzling is the continuity. Why was this statement said after their meal when we were talk the first statement of R’Yochanan in regards to eating.

There are two pipes in the throat, the trachea and the esophagus or the קנה and the ושט. In the Laws of Pesach we are obligated to eat on the night of Pesach while leaning. The gemarah^[3] asks if leaning on the right side is also acceptable. The gemarah seems to conclude that indeed it is acceptable however there is a prohibition that you may choke. The gemarah^[4] states that the Kunuh is where the voice comes from, and the veshet is where everything else comes in and out. Rashi says that speaking while eating is prohibited for fear that when you speak the kunuh becomes exposed and food may enter it. It is clear they it is the voice of Man that separates him from all other species. It is the power of speech that stems from the Neshamah that he is given. The kunuh personifies all that is spiritual as it is rooted in the air we breath and the words that we speak. The veshet represents all physicality as it is the road for food and drink. The prohibition of talking while eating even though it is by all types of speech it is based on the fear that the physical will oppress the spiritual. The eating on Pesach is the task where we eat like royalty. Not royalty and freeman where we live lives full of the pleasures of this world. Rather we ensure that the spiritual rules over the physical.

This idea of Yaakov Lo Mes is of course a deep one. The Maharshah suggests a simple idea if in fact the continued life of Yaakov is similar to all Tzadikim whom are known to live forever in their spiritual form. No this couldn’t be, as that is obvious it must be even in the physical form. In doing so he remains alive in both worlds, this world and the world to come. Chazal tell us another way to live in both worlds by telling over a D’var Torah in the name of that individual. Says the Maharshah^[5] that through every word of Torah spoken a vessel is created that contains those holy words. It is through the mentioning those words by the one who spoke of them it results in his lips moving in his grave. That is compared to stirring your finger in a glass of fine wine in a pit. When you stir it the fragrance emanates throughout. That is what enables a life in both worlds simultaneously.

That parable that the Chazal tells us that wine in a pit is comparable to living in both worlds is quite profound. It is known that the Torah and Mitzvos are compared to wine. It is also known as previously written that the act of putting Yosef in the pit was the transgression that led to the slavery. It was an empty pit says the Torah, empty of water but full of snakes and scorpions. Meaning that the lack of water means the despair of no Torah. Not only no Torah but secluded with the reptiles associated with evilness and heresy. The way to fix this emptiness is through the wine. Through the Torah and Mitzvos. Through the utilization of the Torah we will call on all of the previous vessels that were previously filled with spiritual power. This is the middah of Yosef. This is the concept of Yaakov Lo Mes. Yaakov was asking his son Yosef to ensure him that all that had been established in spirituality would be utilized and flourished. The desert of Egypt is no place for the fulfillment of the Torah and it must not lay there. The physical life in Egypt cannot stand in the way of the servitude of the Torah, as it will suffocate us!

The language that Yaakov says to Yosef is that he shall support him to do chessed v’emes. Why is that the way to ask him to ensure that his body not lay in the land of Egypt? Chessed and Emes are the pillars of the Torah and they are what must support this existence. We need to take care in our lives that we don’t choke. We need to constantly keep our spirituality before our physicality. We must remember the strength of all that we do comes from the Almighty and that it is the strongest force possible. That strength has been practiced for generations passed down from Avraham Avinu until now. Now we are the bearers of the cup of wine. Contained within it is the power to conjure the actions of every single Jews. It is your power to tip the scale from the middle to the top. Take your finger, stick it in and immerse yourself in the eternal bliss that lays before you.

1. Beginning of Parshas Vayeishev [↩]
2. Taynis, 5, b [↩]
3. Pesachim, 108, a [↩]
4. Brachos, 61, a [↩]
5. Yevomos, 97, a [↩]