Vol. 17 Issue #14
Parshas Shemos ‫פרשת שמות‬
Suspecting the Innocent
etuu| `|v{txÄ gtâuxá
When Moshe Rabbeinu is told by Hashem at the
burning bush that he should go and inform Bnei Yisrael that
hashem has spoken to him and will soon redeem them from
slavery, he reacts by stating that the people will not believe
he’s telling the truth (Shemos 4:1). Hashem immediately
responds by giving Moshe two signs that he may show the
people to prove the veracity of his claim; as part of the second sign, Moshe’s hand becomes afflicted with Tzora’as
(ibid Pasuk 6). The Gemara in Shabbos (97a) understands
that this affliction was not merely a random sign for moshe
to use, because, as Rav Achai Gaon explains in the She’iltos,
(Sheilta 40), Hashem could have selected any number of
other signs. Rather, he chose a sign which contained a lesson, indeed a punishment, for Moshe himself because he
had suspected Bnei Yisrael of not believing him. The Gemara thus derives from this story that one who is Choshed
B’ksheirim, that is, he unjustly suspects innocent people, is
punished with a physical affliction as Moshe was.
The Mishnah in Yoma (18b) states that as part of
the preparation for the Avodah in the Beis Hamikdash on
Yom Kippur, the elders among the Kohanim would have
the Kohein Gadol swear that he would not alter the service
in any way; following this, both the Kohein Gadol and the
elders would cry. The Gemara (ibid 19b) explains that he
would cry because they even suspected him of being a
Tzeduki (coming from that group of people who do not
believe in the validity of the Torah SheB’al Peh or the authority of the Rabbanan), and they would cry because if
they were indeed being suspicious of an innocent man, they
would be deserving of the above cited punishment which is
visited upon one who is Choshed B’ksheirim. The Rambam
(Hilchos Teshuvah 4:4 ) lists Choshed B’ksheirim as one of
the Aveiros which prevents a person from being able to fully do Teshuva, explaining that people do not even realize
that it is an Aveirah to consider a good person to be a sinner; people will therefore rarely even attempt to do Teshu-
23Tevet 5773
va for this Aveirah. It is clear from the above that it is prohibited to suspect an innocent person of being a sinner.
Does this prohibition apply to one’s attitude towards all people, or is it possible that sometimes one may
indeed be suspicious of someone else? The Rambam, in
discussing the case of the Kohein Gadol (Hilchos Yom
Hakippurim 1:7), implies that it is prohibited to suspect
anyone whose actions and motivations are not known, because perhaps he has nothing wrong in mind. In his Peirush
on the above Mishnahin Yoma (Perek 1: Mishnah 5), the
Rambam likewise writes that it is forbidden to suspect
someone whose actions are unclear and might be bad; the
Tosafos Yom Tov (ibid: V’Hein) on that Mishnah accepts
this as well. This position appears to work out very nicely
with that of the Mishnah in Pirkei Avos (Perek 1: Mishnah
6) which states “He’ve dan et kol adam l’kaf zechus”, teaching that one should judge all people favorable, a trait which
the Rambam (Hilchos De’os 5:7) says must be possessed by
a Talmid Chochom. Rashi there (ibid Vehevei) asserts that
unless one knows otherwise for sure, one should assume
that other people’s actions are all good, and, citing a Gemara in Shabbos (Daf 127b), writes that one who does this will
himself be judged favorably by Hashem.
The Beraisa in Maseches Kallah Rabbasi (Perek 9),
however, states that one should always consider another
person to be like a thief (at least potentially), which, of
course, implies the exact opposite. The Gemara there
(ibid) immediately questions this statement based on another Mishnah in Pirkei Avos (Perek 2: Mishnah 4) which
teaches that one should not judge someone else [negatively,
as the Bartenura (ibid s.v. V’al Tadin) points out there] until
one has been in that situation, implying, again, that one
should not suspect another person without knowing all the
facts. The Gemara (ibid) responds that in Pirkei Avos, the
Mishnah (ibid) is talking about a person whom one
knows—he should not be judged unfavorably unless all the
facts are clear. In Maseches Kallah Rabbasi, however, the
Beraisa (ibid) is referring to a person whom one does not
know—he may justifiably be suspected of being wicked.
‫ק ול נ ו‬
Rabbeinu Yonah, explaining the Mishnah in Pirkei
Avos about judging others favorably (Perek 1: Mishnah 6),
writes that one should judge the average person favorably
whether one knows him or not, adding in his Sha’arei
Teshuva (Sha’ar 3:218) that this is required by the Torah,
but someone who is known to be a wicked person should
always be viewed in a negative or suspicious light. The Klei
Yakar, commenting on the Posuk in the Torah (Vayikra
19:15) quoted by the Gemara in Shevuos (30a) as the
source for the idea of judging people favorably, notes as
well (B’Tzedek) that a wicked person should not be judged
favorably because the assumption is that he has remained
wicked; one is not considered a choshed b’ksheirim for suspecting such a person because this person is not considered
to be among the k’sheirim The Bartenura on that Mishnah
(ibid Vehevei) also writes that physical punishment is inflicted only upon a choshed b’ksheirim but one who is
choshed a rasha) has done nothing wrong. We see from
here that this prohibition to be suspicious of other people is
not necessarily all-encompassing; there are possible exceptions.
Page 2
Because of this prohibition, though, it is also necessary for one to avoid doing things that make other people
suspicious of him. Rabbeinu Yehuda HaChassid notes in his
Sefer Chassidim (Siman 44) that one who causes suspicions
to be raised about himself is responsible for the reactions of
the people who see him, and hence, their punishment,
when applicable. There may, however, be a distinction
between an individual and a large group of people because
one won’t usually suspect an entire group of being sinners.
The Gemara in Avodah Zarah (43b) indeed says that the
prohibition of being choshed does not apply regarding a
group; we thus need not worry that someone will be
choshed an entire group. The Ramo (Yoreh Deah 141:4)
rules accordingly, and an activity forbidden to an individual
because it may raise suspicions about him may therefore be
permissible for a group.
This last ruling is debated by the Poskim, but the
Magen Avraham (Orach Chaim 244:8) concurs, explaining
that a non-Jew may thus do certain work for a community
on Shabbos which he wouldn’t be able to do for an individual because there will be no suspicion of an entire community. He therefore rules that strictly speaking, although it has
been forbidden for other reasons, a non-Jew may, under
certain circumstances, work on building a Shul on Shabbos
because nobody will think that the community sinned by
hiring him. The Chasam Sofer (Sha’ailos U’TeshuvosOrach Chaim: 60) suggests that this is true only for something like a Shul where the community participates in it to-
Vol. 17 Issue #14
‫ש מע‬
gether, but if many people happen to be doing the same
thing, each on his own behalf, then a problem is created
because they are then like individuals who must avoid suspicious activities, even though there are many of them.
The Pardes Yosef on the Posuk in this Parsha (Shemos ibid
posuk 2) quotes that perhaps this is why Moshe was punished despite being suspicious of a group; he was really
being suspicious of each of Bnai Yisrael as individuals.
Like a Candle in the Dark
WÉä Y|Ç~
Sefer Shemos opens with a repetition of the names
of the descendants of Yaakov Avinu. Rashi points out that
this is not the first time in recent Chumash history that we
have gone through the list. The question that this Rashi is
addressing is what exactly is the purpose of this seemingly
unnecessary repetition here at the beginning of the second
Sefer of Chumash. Rashi explains that this repetition is to
show the love that Hashem has for the Shevatim, for He
counted them while they were alive, and now returns to
count them now that they are no longer alive. Rashi further explains that Hashem does this because the Jews are
compared to stars, which Hashem brings out in number
and name to show His love for them. The question is, what
is the connection between the Shevatim, stars, and the beginning of Sefer Shemos?
To answer this, let’s talk about stars. Say you are
reading this during the day. If you were to take a look outside, you may be able to see many interesting things, but
no stars. During the day, the light of the Sun overpowers
the light of the stars, making them invisible from our perspective. We know that the stars are there, we just can’t
see them. However, if you are reading this sometime at
night and decide to glance up at the sky, if it’s a nice clear
night, you will hopefully see many beautiful stars.
Rav Yaakov Kaminetzky expounds on the explanation of Rashi (quoted above), explaining the repetition of
the names. What we just explained about the Sun, is true
by the Shevatim as well. During the time of Yaakov’s life, the
grandeur of the shevatim couldn’t be realized, because they
were outshined by the greatness of their father. Now that
Yaakov had passed away, it was important for the Shevatim
to realize how special each and everyone of them was as an
individual. While Yaakov was alive, they didn’t necessarily
notice their own power and potential.
Vol. 17 Issue #14
‫ק ול נ ו‬
Here at the beginning of Sefer Shemos is the perfect
time for the pasukim to review all the Shevatim for two reasons. One, the recent loss of Yaakov; and two, the onset of
galus Mitzrayim. For the Shevatim not only to survive galus
Mitzrayim, but to transform into a Klal Yisroel, they all had to
realize their individual greatness.
There are certain moments - sometimes even time
periods - when many things are very clear to us. Those are
the times when the Sun shines bright, so bright, that sometimes we forget about all the beautiful stars that are hidden.
When Yaakov was alive, it was a time period where the
presence of Hashem was as clear as day. Once the Jews entered into Mitzrayim, they needed to realize that each of
them were strong enough to endure the Egyptian Exile.
This also marks the transition between Sefer
Bereishis and Sefer Shemos. The Ramban develops the idea
that Sefer Bereishis is the book of beginnings, and Sefer Shemos is the book of our nation’s formation. That is exactly
what is going on over here between the end of Sefer
Bereishis and Sefer Shemos. The Torah is telling us that
sometimes, unfortunately, we need a nighttime to show us
how each individual star burns bright. In this way, we recognize that when the Sun shines, the stars are burning bright
in the sky, despite the fact that we cannot see them. During
these times of darkness, the kedusha of Klal Yisroel burns
softly like a candle in the dark. May we be zocheh to live in a
time when this dark night time called galus ends, and we
witness the sunlight of the geula when there will be no need
to see the beautiful stars to know that they are there.
Moshe versus Zombies
Tá{xÜ Y|Ç~xÄáàx|Ç
After Moshe’s encounter with G-d at the burning
bush, he is commanded by G-d to return to Egypt and carry
out his mission, “For all those who seek your life (i.e. want
to kill you) have died. (4:19)” On the simple level, as explained by the Rashbam and others, G-d was telling Moshe
in this passuk that he could return to Egypt without fear, for
the old Pharoh, as well as the informers who were out to
get him for killing the Egyptian, had died. Rashi however,
explains this passuk using the concept that a poor person is
like a dead person. Since Dasan and Aviram, who wanted to
kill Moshe, became poor, it was as if they had died. The
Gra finds textual support for Rashi’s explanation from the
fact that the passuk says that those, “who are seeking your
life” have died, implying that they are still seeking to do so,
Page 3
‫ש מע‬
which would no doubt be absurd if they were actually dead.
In any case, since Dasan and Aviram were now beggars,
whatever influence they may have had previously with
Pharoh no longer exists, making it safe for Moshe to return
to Egypt.
Rashi’s explanation brings two important questions
to mind. Firstly, what significance lies in the choice of such
roundabout wording in this passuk to describe the simple
fact that Dasan and Aviram had become poor? In order to
understand this, we must first deal with another question.
Why is a poor person considered dead? Such a concept
would at first glance seem rather offensive and odd. The
Gur Aryeh explains that one of the crucial components of
true life is self-reliance. A poor person who must rely on
others for his own sustenance is therefore considered dead.
This approach leaves many questions unanswered and even
leaves room to suggest that young children who rely on
their parents for their every need are also considered dead,
a strange proposition. Tosfos in Nedarim offers a possibly
more appealing approach. The Gemara there (64b) states
that four people are considered as if they are dead: A poor
person, one with Tzaraas, a blind person, and one who has
no children. Tosfos explains that the purpose of this rabbinic dictum is to teach that these four conditions are particularly severe and one should therefore be sure to pray for
those who are in those situations. In other words, these four
conditions are particularly hopeless and require extra prayer.
With the approach of Tosfos in mind, we can now
begin to understand our first question. Interestingly, all
four categories of people considered to be dead appear in
Parshas Shemos, some in more subtle ways than others. The
Jewish people at the time were “dead” in almost all of the
four ways possible. The poor person is hinted to by the passuk we have already discussed, as explained by Rashi. Needless to say, most of the Jewish people were in abject poverty at the time, as they were slaves. Not only that, but they
were blind as well, metaphorically speaking. With all the
back-breaking labor they were enduring, no one could think
beyond the immediate task in front of him. A redeeming Gd and the possibility of a brighter future were simply not
visible to the Jewish people wading in mud to build yet another brick as yet another lash fell upon their scarred backs.
All they could do was yell in pain and agony. They could
not save themselves. Furthermore, at the beginning of the
Parsha, even the physical extinction of the Jewish people
was a possibility. According to the Midrash, when Pharoh
decreed that the baby boys be thrown into the river, Amram divorced his wife. The other Jews followed suit so that
Page 4
Vol. 17 Issue #14
‫ש מ ע ק ול נ ו‬
no children would be born, until Miriam convinced Amram an that no baby should? Doesn’t Rashi state explicitly that
he was mistaken.
the reason Moshe did not nurse from an Egyptian was beWhy does this theme of the four people who are cause he was destined to speak directly to Hashem which is
considered like they are dead recur throughout the Parsha? not the case with all other babies? He answers with a very
The answer lies in yet another time when one of these four powerful yet fundamental idea. Oftentimes we observe
categories comes up. At the burning bush, Moshe’s hand great tzaddikim or talmidei chachmim and think that they are
was turned white with Tzaraas and then quickly restored to different types of people than us - the common men. We
normalcy. This was clearly meant to teach Moshe a lesson feel that we could never achieve such greatness and, consewhich the other references to the four dead men were quently, we set the bar too low for ourselves and our chilteaching him as well. Moshe at first had little faith in the dren. This mindset is improper. From the fact that the halaJewish people. He felt that they were unworthy and incapa- cha dictates that no baby should nurse from a non-Jewish
ble of being redeemed, so low they had sunk. They were
woman we see that all Jewish children, no matter what
utterly hopeless; destitute, blinded by their suffering and
without hope for their children. With the miraculous heal- background they come from, have the potential to speak
ing of Moshe’s leprous hand, Hashem showed Moshe that directly to Hashem, just as Moshe did. For this reason, from
the Jewish people are never hopeless. No matter how deep- the earliest moments in their lives, we treat them as if they
ly entrenched they are in the most horrific of depths, there are destined for greatness and provide the opportunity for
is always a way out. The Jewish people may have been akin maximal growth.
to a dead man, but the dead man would be given life once
It is critical that we internalize this idea being conagain. Moshe took this lesson to heart, and returned to
Egypt to restore his nation of zombies to their full potential veyed by the Torah and truly strive to maximize our potentials. We must avoid the mindset off excluding ourselves
as the people of Hashem.
from the category of those destined for spiritual greatness
Qualifications of being a Gadol
and recognize that Hashem gave each of us a unique set of
capabilities and talents and, when maximized properly, each
`x|Ü Y|Ç~xÄáàx|Ç
person can use his given set of abilities to become a Gadol in
After Moshe is brought to the palace by Bas Paroh,
his own right.
the Torah describes how she attempted to have him nurse
from n Egyptian woman but Moshe refused to do so. Rashi
(2:7) explains that Moshe would not nurse from an EgypRosh Yeshiva: Rabbi Michael Taubes
tian because he was destined to speak directly to Hashem
and such a holy mouth could not have been nourished by a
Rabbinic Advisor: Rabbi Baruch Penon-Jew.
sach Mendelson
The Ramo (Yoreh Deyah siman 81 seif 7) codifies
Editors in Chief: Meir Finkelstein and
the practice of Moshe Rabbeinu, writing that ideally one
Yoni Schwartz
should not nurse from a non-Jew woman however, he adds
that if one does so, it is technically mutar. The Vilna Gaon
Layout Editor: Ori Putterman
(Beiur HaGra ibid) points out that the reason one should
ideally refrain from such a practice is so because we find
that Moshe Rabbeinu refused to nurse from an Egyptian
woman and therefore no baby should be nursed by a nonJewish woman.
Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky (Emes l’Yaakov, shemos
2:7) is troubled by the source given by the Vilna Gaon for
the above halacha. How could we derive from the fact that
Moshe Rabbeinu would not nurse from a non-Jewish wom-
Associate Editor: Akiva Schiff
Distribution Coordinator: Binyamin
Pfeiffer
Publication Manager: Philip Meyer
Head Of Writing Staff: Yehuda Tager