Category Archives: Uncategorized

Parshas Chayai Sarah

וַתָּמָת שָׂרָה בְּקִרְיַת אַרְבַּע הִוא חֶבְרוֹן בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן וַיָּבֹא אַבְרָהָם לִסְפֹּד לְשָׂרָה וְלִבְכֹּתָהּ: -בראשית כג/ב

And Avraham came to eulogize Sarah and to cry. (Braishis 23/2)

Zera Shimshon asks that the words in this possuk seem to be out of order. Concerning the seven days of mourning the Gemorro in Moad Katan (27b) says that, “the first three days of mourning is for weeping and the next days are to eulogize.” First comes tears and then comes the eulogy.  Similarly, the eulogist usually cries before he gives his eulogy. Therefore, seemingly, it would be more correct to write, “And Avraham came TO CRY AND EULOGIZE Sarah and not EULOGIZE SARAH AND TO CRY. Why then does the possuk mention that Avraham came to eulogize before he cried.
Secondly he asks that the letter “chahv” in the word “lifkos”- to cry- is written smaller then other letters in the Sefer Torah. What is Torah coming to teach us with this?
He answers in light of an idea that the Sefer Maavar Yabok writes. He writes that the tears that are shed for someone who passed away are tremendously beneficial for the deceased person. They open up for him the “Gates of Tears” (Shaari Dimma) in heaven which is a place where people are judged very very mercifully. However the Sefer Maavar Yabok adds that not all tears are equal.Only tears that are shed for the benefit of the deceased’s nefesh (soul, spiritual part of a personO have the ability to open Shaari Dimma. Tears that are directed towards the deceased’s body, that is gone forever (or crying himself – how difficult it will be for him, his family, or his community without the deceased etc.- do not open the Shaari Dimma.
Eulogizes obviously focus on the deceased’s good deeds and his spiritual strengths. Therefore the Torah writes that Avraham first eulogized Sarah and then cried to show that Avraham weeped for Sarah nefesh and and not for the physical lose.
This is also the reason that the “chahv” is written small to show that although there were two reasons to cry, for her nefesh and for the lose of the body, his tears were directed only towards her nefesh and not towards her physical body or towards himself at all

———————————————-2———————————————-
גֵּר וְתוֹשָׁב אָנֹכִי עִמָּכֶם תְּנוּ לִי אֲחֻזַּת קֶבֶר עִמָּכֶם וְאֶקְבְּרָה מֵתִי מִלְּפָנָי:בראשית כג/ד

On the possuk (Braishis 23/4), “I am a foreigner and a resident among you…” Rashi comments, “A Medrash Aggado explains, ‘If you wish I will act like a foreigner (and I will buy the Maaras HaMachpaila from you), but if (you will) not (sell it to me then) I will act as a resident and take it by rights since HaKodesh Baruch Hue said to me, “To your offsprings I will give this land.””
From this medrash we learn that Avraham Avinu was determined to bury Sarah Eimainu in the Maaras HaMachpaila and offered Bnei Chais to choose one of two options how it would become his; either he would buy it from them or he would take it because Hashem promised it to him and therefore it was legally his.
Zera Shimshon asks that if Avraham was really entitled to the land because of Hashem’s promise, then why did he offer to buy it from Efron like a foreigner? Why would Avraham want to pay for the land that is rightfully his?
He answers in light of a machlokos brought in Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 163/2). The halacha is that if a person buys a house in a city he automatically becomes a citizen of that city with all of its obligations and benefits. There is a machlokos, though, in which specific situation does this halacha apply. Some say that this is only if he bought the house in order to permanently live there. Others say that it applies even if he intends to live there for only a short period of time.
According to this, explains Zera Shimshon, Avraham didn’t want to take the Maaras HaMachpaila as a gift but he wanted to buy it. However he didn’t only buy a small plot but the whole field. Because he also wanted to buy the whole field he was concerned that Bnei Chaiss would think that he planned to permanently live next to his wife’s grave. Therefore Avraham was concerned that Bnei Chais did not want him to be a part of their city and because of this they would not let Avraham buy it.
To put them at ease he told them that if the custom in Chevron was like the first opinion in Shulchan Aruch, that only a person who plans to live in a city forever becomes a citizen, then he will buy the field and stipulate that he will continue to be a foreigner. If however the custom in Chevron was like the second opinion, that even one who buys a house to live there for a short period becomes a citizen, then he will take from his legal rights!

———————————————-3———————————————-

Concerning Avraham’s burial of Sarah the Medrash comments: This is the meaning of the verse “Whoever runs after righteousness and kindness finds life, prosperity and honor.” (The possuk is referring to Avrohom)…Whoever runs after righteousness” … “and kindness” (is referring to when Avrohom) was kind to Sarah (at the time of her funeral).
The Zera Shimshon asks why is Avrohom described as someone who “runs after kindness” for burying Sarah? The halocho requires every husband to bury his wife! What then was so special about what Avrohom did?
He answers this question by first asking another question.
Right after Sarah passed away Avrohom spoke to B’nei Chais and asked them to approach Effron to ask him to sell Maaros HaMachpaila to him to bury Sarah. The Zera Shimshon asks why didn’t Avrohom speak to Effron directly? The normal reason that a person doesn’t directly negotiate is either to convince the seller, who is hesitant to sell, to sell or to bargain for a good price.
Concerning Avrohom, however, these two reasons weren’t relevant. Firstly, Avorohm specifically said that he didn’t care how much it cost. And secondly, we don’t find anywhere that Effron was hesitant to sell!
And even if he wanted a middle man for some other reason, why did he need a whole nation to be present? Why wasn’t it enough that only one person would speak to him?
He answers that the reason he called of B’nei Chais was not to mediate a good deal. Rather he felt that Sarah deserved a big funeral. The way he orchestrated this was by calling B’nei Chais to mediate the selling of the burial plot. Like this, Avrohom reasoned, since they were there, they would stay for the funeral and Sarah would have a big funeral that she deserved.
This, concludes the Zera Shimshon, is why the Medrash praises Avrohom for burying Sarah. Even though a husband is obliged to bury his wife he certainly isn’t required to go to great lengths to insure that a lot of people will attend. The only reason that Avrohom did do it was because he ran after kindness!

HaRav Shimshon Nachmaini, author of Zera Shimshon lived in Italy about 300 years ago in the time of the Or HaChaim HaKodesh.

The Chida writes that he was a great Mekubal and wrote many sefarim including sefarim about practical kabbolo but asked that all of his sefarim be buried after he passes away except for Zera Shimshon and Niflaos Shimshon on Avos.

He had one child who died in his lifetime (hence the name Zera Shimshon) and in the preface he promises for people who learn his sefarim after he dies ... And your eyes will see children and grandchildren like the offshoots of an olive tree around your tables, wise and understanding with houses filled with all manner of good things... and wealth and honor......

If you are interested in buying your own copy of the Hebrew version of Zera Shimshon

Call 05271-66-450 in Eretz Yisroel

or

347-496-5657 in the U.S.A.

You can now  HEAR shiurim of Zera Shimshon on Kol Halashon:

In E. Yisroel: 073-2951-727 or 03-617-1111 and then press 1,1,3,24

In U.S.A. (718) 395-2440 and then press 2,6,4,24

_________________________
To have new D’vrei Torah sent directly to your inbox fill in boxes below:



Parshas Balak

כִּֽי־מֵרֹ֤אשׁ צֻרִים֙ אֶרְאֶ֔נּוּ וּמִגְּבָע֖וֹת אֲשׁוּרֶ֑נּוּ הֶן־עָם֙ לְבָדָ֣ד יִשְׁכֹּ֔ן וּבַגּוֹיִ֖ם לֹ֥א יִתְחַשָּֽׁב׃

It is written in the Gemorro (Sanhedrin39/a), “A certain heretic said to RAvina, “It is written, “Who is like Your people Yisroel, a unique nation on Earth.” (The heretic asked) Why do you think that you are so special? You are also intermixed with us (the nations of the world). Like it is written, “All nations are a nonentity in His sight…” He (RAvina) replied, “One of yours (Billum) testified about us (that we are unique), “There is a people that dwells apart, Not reckoned among the nations”.

Zera Shimshon asks why did RAvina stress that Billum agreed that we are unique. The heretic proved his point (that we were not unique) simply by citing a possuk without mentioning who said it. Why then did RAvina have to say that it was “one of yours” who agreed that we are unique?

He answers in light of the Medrash (quoted in Rashi Bamidbar 23/9) on the possuk, “There is a people that dwells apart, Not reckoned among the nations.”

The Medrash comments, “Not reckoned among the nations….When they rejoice no other nation rejoices with them… and when the nations are prosperous they (Bnei Yisroel) eat with each one of them and yet it is not taken into account to diminish their reward in the World To Come…”

In other words, on the one hand we are connected with the nations of the world, when they are prosperous, but on the other hand we are separate, when we rejoice.

In light of this, Zera Shimshon explains that the heretic’s complaint was that it isn’t right that the Jewish people rejoice with the other nations but the other nations don’t rejoice with the prosperity of the Jewish people.

In truth Yaakov and his descendants don’t really deserve any happiness in this world. When Yaakov and Eisav divided the universe between themselves, Yaakov was meant to inherit the World To Come, with no part of this world, and Eisav was meant to inherit this world. However the Medrash explains that Yaakov convinced Eisav to give him also a small part of this world (even though according to the original division we were not meant to get part of this world).

Therefore, argued the heretic, since Eisav let the Jewish people enjoy a part of HIS inheritance, it is only fair that Eisav should also get a small portion of Yaakov’s portion and to rejoice when we rejoice. Since it is not like this, then the whole deal was a mistake, isn’t valid and he wants back even that small amount the Yaakov took.

RAvina answered back that even though he might be right that the transaction was a mistake, since their prophet, Billum admitted that it was ours then it becomes legally ours because of the rule, “the admission of the litigant (baal din) is as valid as a hundred witnesses.”

Since RAvina’s counter argument was built on the rule, “the admission of the litigant (baal din) is as valid as a hundred witnesses” he had to mention that Bilum agreed!

2ִּ

(יָדַעְתִּי אֵת אֲשֶׁר תְּבָרֵךְ מְבֹרָךְ וַאֲשֶׁר תָּאֹר יוּאָר:(במדבר כב/ו

Because I (Balak) know whoever you bless are blessed and whoever you curse will be cursed. (Bamidbar 22/6)

Zera Shimshon points out that when Balak mentions the people who Billam blesses he says that they “are blessed”; present tense. On the other hand when he mentions that people who Billam curses he says “will be cursed”; future tense. What is the reason for this change?

He answers in light of Rashi’s commentary in Parshas Shemos.

There it is written, “And Hashem said further to him (to Moshe), ‘Now put your hand into your chest,’ and he put his hand into his chest, and he took it out, and behold, his hand was leprous like snow.”(Shemos 4/6)

It is written in the next possuk, “And He (Hashem) said (to Moshe), ‘Put your hand back into your chest,’ and he put his hand back into his chest, and [when] he took it out of his chest, it had become again like [the rest of] his flesh.”

Rashi asks that in the first possuk when it describes how Moshe’s hand became leperous it says, “he took it out, and behold, his hand was leprous like snow”. This implies that his hand became leperous only after he removed it from his chest. However it says in the second possuk, when Moshe put his hand into his chest to be healed, “[when] he took it out of his chest, it had become again like [the rest of] his fleshhad from his chest”. This implies that his hand healed when it was still on the chest and not only after he removed it. Why the change?

Rashi answers, “From here, [we learn] that the Divine measure of good comes quicker than the measure of retribution, for in the first instance [verse 6] it does not say, from his chest.

In the same fashion, explains Zera Shimshon, we can understand the change of tenses in our possuk.

The berachos of Billum take effect immediately but the curses, take a little time to take effect because, “the Divine measure of good comes quicker than the measure of retribution.”

3

(וַיַּעֲמֹד מַלְאַךְ יְדֹוָד בְּמִשְׁעוֹל הַכְּרָמִים גָּדֵר מִזֶּה וְגָדֵר מִזֶּה: (במדבר כב/כד

And the malach of Hashem stood in the path of vineyards with a fence on this side and a fence on that side. (Bamidbar 22/24)

Zera Shimshon asks why is it important for the Torah to mention that the Malach stood in a path of vineyards between two walls. Why wouldn’t it have been enough to say simply that the Malach stood on a path closed in by two walls?

He answers in light of the Medrash Rabah (Parshas Noach) that says that after Noach left the ark and planted a vineyard he met a female demon. She said to him, “Let’s be partners (in the vineyard). But be careful, she warned, because if you take from my portion I will strike and injure you.”

In other words the Medrash teaches us that vineyards and wine are not something simple but they have  two parts, one portion is kosher and the other one belongs to the Satan. Therefore when someone drinks wine he has to heed the advice that the female demon gave to Noach and be very careful not to “cross lines” and take from the “other” half.

According to this, Zera Shimshon explains, the reason that the Malach appeared to Billum in a vineyard was to allude to him that he is similar to a vineyard in that he also has two parts. One the one hand Hashem gave him prophecy but on the other hand there is an evil part of him that belongs to the Satan. The Malach, who was a Malach of Mercy, was warning him not to fall into the hands of Satan but to carry out the wishes of Hashem.

According to this, adds Zera Shimshon, we can also understand why the Malach appeared to Billum between two walls. It is to allude to him that he has to be very very careful to stay on the right side of the partnership in him and not to go to the side of the Satan.

HaRav Shimshon Nachmaini, author of Zera Shimshon lived in Italy about 300 years ago in the time of the Or HaChaim HaKodesh.

The Chida writes that he was a great Mekubal and wrote many sefarim including sefarim about practical kabbolo but asked that all of his sefarim be buried after he passes away except for Zera Shimshon and Niflaos Shimshon on Avos.

He had one child who died in his lifetime (hence the name Zera Shimshon) and in the preface he promises for people who learn his sefarim after he dies ... And your eyes will see children and grandchildren like the offshoots of an olive tree around your tables, wise and understanding with houses filled with all manner of good things and wealth and honor

These d’vrai Torah are dedicated to Esther Yenta Bas Chana Chassia. In the merit of the learning Zera Shimshon’s divrai TorahHashem should answer her prayers and she should quickly find her proper match along with all the other members of Clal Yisroel who are also looking for their zivug hagun.

If you are interested in buying your own copy of the Hebrew version of Zera Shimshon

Call 05271-66-450 in Eretz Yisroel

or

347-496-5657 in the U.S.A.

You can now  HEAR shiurim of Zera Shimshon on Kol Halashon:

In E. Yisroel: 073-2951-727 or 03-617-1111 and then press 1,1,3,24

In U.S.A. (718) 395-2440 and then press 2,6,4,24

_________________________
To have new D’vrei Torah sent directly to your inbox fill in boxes below: