DIVREI TORAH ON PARSHAS DEVARIM
The Torah teaches people everything they need to know, including the life skills necessary to speak to other people. When Moshe Rabbeinu asks Hashem to forgive Klal Yisroel for making the Eigal, he says, Lomo Hashem Yechere Apecho B’amecho, Hashem, why are you getting angry at your nation. However, when Moshe Rabbeinu speaks to Klal Yisroel, he tells them, Atem Chatosem Chato’o Gedolo, you have done a terrible sin.
I know several people who will agree with the person to whom they’re speaking, when they’re mediating between two people, such as a husband and wife. While mediating between Hashem and Klal Yisroel, Moshe Rabbeinu did the opposite. He asked Hashem, and told Klal Yisroel, what they should change, and not what the other had to change. He tells Hashem that He shouldn’t become upset, and Klal Yisroel that they did something wrong. This is how I understand this.
When I speak, individually, to people during a mediation session, I can choose to agree with each (as many others will do to get them “on their side”) but, by agreeing, I’m telling them not to change, and that the other person is wrong. Telling one side of the mediation table that they’re right, means that the other side is wrong. This confirms their right to be angry at the other person, and I haven’t gained anything.
Instead, I’ll explain to each party that I won’t discuss what they believe the other person did wrong to him/her. I’ll discuss what that person may have done wrong. Both sides need to adjust, and “you (the person I’m speaking to) must only focus on your contribution to the present issue.”
To the Ribono Shel Olam, Moshe Rabbeinu invokes Zechus Avos, and other reasons why He should forgive Klal Yisroel. Nevertheless, Klal Yisroel has to know that they did something terrible.
If people would understand how to learn from the Torah to live successfully, they would “run” to the Torah much more quickly. Parents should transmit each part of all of the Torah’s lessons to their children, and have them appreciate that the Torah is Darchei Noam, a sweet path.
I know several people who will agree with the person to whom they’re speaking, when they’re mediating between two people, such as a husband and wife. While mediating between Hashem and Klal Yisroel, Moshe Rabbeinu did the opposite. He asked Hashem, and told Klal Yisroel, what they should change, and not what the other had to change. He tells Hashem that He shouldn’t become upset, and Klal Yisroel that they did something wrong. This is how I understand this.
When I speak, individually, to people during a mediation session, I can choose to agree with each (as many others will do to get them “on their side”) but, by agreeing, I’m telling them not to change, and that the other person is wrong. Telling one side of the mediation table that they’re right, means that the other side is wrong. This confirms their right to be angry at the other person, and I haven’t gained anything.
Instead, I’ll explain to each party that I won’t discuss what they believe the other person did wrong to him/her. I’ll discuss what that person may have done wrong. Both sides need to adjust, and “you (the person I’m speaking to) must only focus on your contribution to the present issue.”
To the Ribono Shel Olam, Moshe Rabbeinu invokes Zechus Avos, and other reasons why He should forgive Klal Yisroel. Nevertheless, Klal Yisroel has to know that they did something terrible.
If people would understand how to learn from the Torah to live successfully, they would “run” to the Torah much more quickly. Parents should transmit each part of all of the Torah’s lessons to their children, and have them appreciate that the Torah is Darchei Noam, a sweet path.
The author can be contacted at shmuelgluck@areivim.com
The Sifri says that there are four reasons that Yakov, Moshe, Yehoshua, and Shmuel, didn’t criticize Klal Yisroel until they were near their death. One of those reasons was to avoid being a Mochiach V’chozer U’mo’chi’ach, constantly repeating the same message, or, in English, what we call nagging.
Waiting until just prior to their death to “bring up” past deeds assumes that Klal Yisroel did Teshuva for past sins. If not, there would’ve been a Mitzvoh repeat the criticism as many times as necessary. However, if Klal Yisroel did Teshuva, why did Moshe Rabbeinu bring up the Aveiros that they did many years before?
I believe the explanation is the following. People can learn lessons on multiple levels. For instance, imagine a parent telling a five year old child not to call his brother stupid. A few minutes later, the parent hears the same child calling his brother dumb. When confronted by the parent, the child, sincerely, says, “You told me not to call him stupid but didn’t say anything about not calling him dumb”. That child learned the lesson from his parent in such a narrow manner that, although the specific lesson was learned, little was gained.
Klal Yisroel may have done immediate Teshuva for worshiping the Eigal, but that was of limited value. The broader message, not to be an Am K’shei Oreph, a stubborn nation, may have slipped past them. The Eigel was a one-time act. Being stubborn is a trait which, unless it’s recognized as such, will stay with them for many generations. That’s why criticism and self-reflection was required even after the Aveirah was acknowledged.
People must attempt to understand the entire scope of their error. If not, they can become a Kelev Shov El Ke’yo, like a dog that returns to the food it recently vomited, not realizing that it’s the same food it has already tried to eat. They keep repeating mistakes, and claim ignorance, or worse, that life isn’t fair. In reality, with thought, they should have learned from their mistakes a broader lesson.
Waiting until just prior to their death to “bring up” past deeds assumes that Klal Yisroel did Teshuva for past sins. If not, there would’ve been a Mitzvoh repeat the criticism as many times as necessary. However, if Klal Yisroel did Teshuva, why did Moshe Rabbeinu bring up the Aveiros that they did many years before?
I believe the explanation is the following. People can learn lessons on multiple levels. For instance, imagine a parent telling a five year old child not to call his brother stupid. A few minutes later, the parent hears the same child calling his brother dumb. When confronted by the parent, the child, sincerely, says, “You told me not to call him stupid but didn’t say anything about not calling him dumb”. That child learned the lesson from his parent in such a narrow manner that, although the specific lesson was learned, little was gained.
Klal Yisroel may have done immediate Teshuva for worshiping the Eigal, but that was of limited value. The broader message, not to be an Am K’shei Oreph, a stubborn nation, may have slipped past them. The Eigel was a one-time act. Being stubborn is a trait which, unless it’s recognized as such, will stay with them for many generations. That’s why criticism and self-reflection was required even after the Aveirah was acknowledged.
People must attempt to understand the entire scope of their error. If not, they can become a Kelev Shov El Ke’yo, like a dog that returns to the food it recently vomited, not realizing that it’s the same food it has already tried to eat. They keep repeating mistakes, and claim ignorance, or worse, that life isn’t fair. In reality, with thought, they should have learned from their mistakes a broader lesson.
The author can be contacted at shmuelgluck@areivim.com
In the beginning of the Parsha, Moshe Rabbeinu lists, B’remez, multiple mistakes that Klal Yisroel made during their forty years in the desert, delicately, not to offend them. For instance, V’chatezeiros, refers to the challenge from Korach, and Di Zohov, refers to the Eigel. Since Moshe Rabbeinu was speaking to the new generation, those people who didn’t do any of those Aveiros, why did he have to mention them at all? If there was a need to mention them, why did it have to be done delicately?
Rav Moshe Feinstein, explains why it was necessary for men who saw a Soteh killed in the Har Habayis, to become Nizirim. They had done nothing wrong and, in addition, they saw how the Torah punishes a sin. Why did they have to distance themselves from the pleasures of wine?
Rav Moshe explains that people who experience thought changing events often need “reprogramming”. Their view of the norm may have become distorted. For example, there are many Aveiros that people are comfortable in doing, since it’s “what everyone does” and, while they accept that it is wrong, they accept it in others and, maybe, even in themselves. These people need to be deprogrammed, and then reprogrammed. Their attitude should be that no Aveiro is tolerable, even if it is commonly done.
There are also attitudes that people believe are Toradick, having seen them since they were young. Some people may believe (even if only subconsciously), that giving a lot of Tzedoko removes their responsibility to have good personal character; other people may believe that if they learn a lot of Torah, their decisions will be flawless. Even the best of people require reprogramming in some area.
When Moshe Rabbeinu spoke to Klal Yisroel, he was speaking to them, not because they did these Aveiros, but with an understanding that they shouldn’t see those Aveiros as the “norm”. Therefore he revisited the events of the past, but had to do it with sensitivity, because they had done nothing wrong.
People should think about which of the attitudes they have adopted were from unhealthy sources, and which of those they are “handing down” to their children.
Rav Moshe Feinstein, explains why it was necessary for men who saw a Soteh killed in the Har Habayis, to become Nizirim. They had done nothing wrong and, in addition, they saw how the Torah punishes a sin. Why did they have to distance themselves from the pleasures of wine?
Rav Moshe explains that people who experience thought changing events often need “reprogramming”. Their view of the norm may have become distorted. For example, there are many Aveiros that people are comfortable in doing, since it’s “what everyone does” and, while they accept that it is wrong, they accept it in others and, maybe, even in themselves. These people need to be deprogrammed, and then reprogrammed. Their attitude should be that no Aveiro is tolerable, even if it is commonly done.
There are also attitudes that people believe are Toradick, having seen them since they were young. Some people may believe (even if only subconsciously), that giving a lot of Tzedoko removes their responsibility to have good personal character; other people may believe that if they learn a lot of Torah, their decisions will be flawless. Even the best of people require reprogramming in some area.
When Moshe Rabbeinu spoke to Klal Yisroel, he was speaking to them, not because they did these Aveiros, but with an understanding that they shouldn’t see those Aveiros as the “norm”. Therefore he revisited the events of the past, but had to do it with sensitivity, because they had done nothing wrong.
People should think about which of the attitudes they have adopted were from unhealthy sources, and which of those they are “handing down” to their children.
The author can be contacted at shmuelgluck@areivim.com
If you enjoyed or benefited from these divrei torah please consider making a donation to Areivim
© AREIVIM ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Reprinting this article for commercial use without the express consent of Areivim is strictly prohibited. To request permission please contact the Areivim office at 845 371 2760 or info@areivim.com.
