In this week’s parsha, when discussing the luchos,

Rashi brings down the opinion of Rav Meir (B”B

14B) that there were two aronos. One held the

shivrei haluchos and the other held the second set

of luchos. The first one would go out to war with

Klal Yisrael while the second one had to stay in

Machaneh Leviah. What was the significance

behind each one’s role? When Moshe Rabeinu

broke the first set of luchos, the pasuk says he

broke it tachas hahar, under the mountain. Why is

that important for us to know? The last Rashi in the

Torah tells us that when Moshe Rabeinu broke the

luchos Hashem responded by saying, “Thank you

for breaking the luchos.” The Midrash says that the

letters of the luchos flew away and the structure of

the luchos became heavy and fell. If so, why is

Hashem thanking Moshe Rabeinu if they would

have broken anyway?

In order to answer our questions, we have to first

understand the difference between the two sets of

luchos. The first set was made completely by

Hashem while the second set had Moshe involved

in the making of it. Rav Chaim Friedlander

explains that the first set was completely spiritual

and the kedusha would come forth without any

need for human input. The second luchos were

made by Moshe Rabeinu’s physical contribution,

thereby mixing the physical with the spiritual,

causing the kedusha to be more hidden. Bnei

Yisrael was then required to work to bring out that

kedusha. The Netziv says that the way the luchos

were created represents our relationship with

Torah Sheb’al Peh. The luchos were kulo kedusha

and had no human contribution. The same was

with the Torah Sheb’al Peh. Moshe used the yud

gimmel middos, went through the sugya, and

would give over clear halacha with no need for our

contribution. Hashem wanted Moshe to be

involved in the creation of the second set of luchos

to teach us that we too need to be involved and

have to be mechadesh Torah. The Maharal asks

why it says “L’maan Yitav lach- so that it should

be good for you” by the second set of luchos and

not the first set? He explains that since the first set

was completely spiritual, it would have been

tremendously difficult for us to attain it on a

complete level, as we are physical beings. The

second set of luchos has an aspect of gashmius,

making it more relatable to us.

Going back to our questions, the first set of luchos

פרשת עקבBy: Rabbi Mechi Plittman

זתשע" מנחם אב 'כ August 12, 2017

were able to leave the machaneh and go to war with

Klal Yisrael because they represent kedusha that

was already revealed. When something is entirely

spiritual, there is no fear that the outside world

would be mashpiah on it. On the contrary, the

complete kedusha will affect those around it. The

second luchos which had kedusha mixed with

gashmius, had to stay hidden in Machaneh Leviah.

When there is a mixture of physical and spiritual,

the danger of being influenced from the outside

world is greater and one must take precaution

against negative hashpaah.

When Moshe Rabeinu broke the luchos, it says he

broke them “tachas hahar - under the mountain.”

We find a similar language by Matan Torah when

the pasuk says,”Vayisyatzvu b’tachtis hahar- they

stood under the mountain.” The Gemara says on

this that Hashem put a mountain over us, forcing us

to accept the Torah. The Midrash Tanchuma asks

why this was necessary if Bnei Yisrael already

accepted the Torah with naaseh v’nishma? He

answers that naaseh v’nishma was referring to

Torah Shebichsav and Hashem had to force us to

accept Torah Sheb’al Peh. We see that “under the

mountain” refers to Torah Sheba’l Peh. When

Moshe broke the luchos under the mountain, he was

sending us a message of why it needed to be broken.

He was telling us that we were not able and not

fitting to accept Torah Sheb’al Peh the way Hashem

originally intended it to be when we were “tachas

hahar”. Doing the chet ha’egel, an act of gashmius,

was showing we could not handle a Torah that is

kulo kedusha without any physical input. We

needed a Torah Sheb’al Peh that required physical

exertion and intellectual input to connect to and

attain it. Regarding the action of Moshe Rabeinu

breaking the luchos, they would have broken

anyway. Hashem was thanking Moshe for the

message he sent to Klal Yisrael while he was

breaking them; the message that they now needed a

Torah Sheb’al Peh that required physical and

intellectual input. This is implied by Rashi as he

says that Hashem was agreeing to Moshe’s

intentions when he broke the first set of luchos.

With this in mind, we should understand that we

must, like the Netziv says, exert ourselves, be

mechadesh Torah, and bring out its kedusha into the

world. May all of us be zoche to toil and be

mechadesh Torah.

Rabbi Plittman is a member of the Kollel.

Please join us for our Sunday Morning Avos U’Banim in Kehilas Bais Yosef at 9:30!

HALACHA CENTER

By: Rabbi S.Y. Fryshman הלכות תשלומין 7#

The Bais Yosef cites the Smak

who writes that one who forgot

Maariv does tashlumin as follows:

he says Birchos Krias Shema

followed by Shmoneh Esrei as

usual, and says Ashrei and then

davens his second Shmoneh Esrei

for tashlumin. The same applies to

someone who forgot Mincha and

is davening Maariv twice. One

question that stands out is when

one should say Tachanun. The

Levush writes that Tachanun

should be said after the second

Shmoneh Esrei he said for

Tashlumin, because the tefilah of

Tashlumin should be said as close

as possible to the main tefilah.

(However, there must be some

amount of separation - at least the

time it takes to walk four amos, as

the Shulchan Aruch paskens in

Siman 105. Therefore, it is more

appropriate to say Ashrei, so as to

stand Shmoneh Esrei coming off

of divrei Torah.) The Malbushei

Yom Tov writes that perhaps the

Smak intended that one should in

fact say Tachanun first. The

reason he did not say so is because

there are many days when

Tachanun is not said and in fact in

his other works he does indeed

pasken that Tachanun should be

said before tashlumin. The Elya

Rabbah understands that one

should say Tachanun and Ashrei

and then the second Shmoneh

Esrei, followed by Lamnatzeiach

and U’va L’tzion. The Machtzis

Hashekel (4) however, disagrees

and says that only Tachanun

should be said, except on days

when Tachanun is not said, and

then Ashrei should be said. The

Pri Megadim sides with the Elya

Rabbah. This seems to be the

opinion of the Mishna Berura.

The Mishna Berura does add that

one should also listen first to

Chazaras Hashatz. To be

continued…