The Weekly Shtikle Blog

The Weekly Shtikle - Naso

2026-05-29T15:22:47.583-04:00

This coming Monday, 16 Sivan, is the 23^rd yahrtzeit of R' Ephraim Eisenberg, zt"l of Ner Yisroel. The shtikle is dedicated l'iluy nishmaso, Ephraim Zalman ben Chayim HaLevi.

This week's parsha includes extensive discussions of the laws pertaining to the sotah and the nazir, one after the other. Their respective tractates of gemara, aptly named Nazir and Sotah, also appear side by side, although in the opposite order. The juxtaposition of these two topics is discussed in the gemara at the beginning of maseches Sotah. Rebbi would say that anyone who is present and witnesses the public humiliation of the sotah should make sure he is not adversely affected by his experience and restrict himself from drinking wine, one of the principal requirements of the nazir. Refraining from wine will make sure that any impure thoughts do not translate into indecent behaviour.

Perhaps another understanding may be offered. Sotah represents the epitome of reckless conduct, a blatant disregard for the sanctity of the marriage bond. Although there are many other instances of sinful behaviour in the Torah, this is elaborated upon in much greater depth. Perhaps more importantly, it impresses upon us how seemingly innocent conversation between a man and woman has the potential to lead to destructive consequences. Sotah symbolizes brazen disregard of Torah values.

Nazir, however, is at the other end of the spectrum. The nazir abstains from (some of) the pleasures of this world and leads a life of extreme holiness. Although curbing one's level of indulgence is often looked upon as commendable, the practice of nazir is surprisingly not. The gemara, on a number of occasions (Taanis 11a, Nedarim 10a, Nazir 19a, 22a, Bava Kamma 91b) dwells on the pasuk (6:11) in this week's parsha, concerning the nazir's sacrifices, "and it shall atone for him from that which he sinned on the soul." What sin did the nazir commit? R' Elazar HaKefar teaches that his sin was that he caused himself undue anguish in refraining from wine. And if one is called a sinner for merely refraining from wine, all the more so one who restricts himself excessively from all other pleasures.

With this perspective, sotah and nazir represent the two extremes of behaviour discouraged by the Torah. The sotah is one who is overindulgent and runs after pleasure. The nazir is one who withdraws himself from pleasure and inflicts upon himself excessive suffering. By putting the two side by side, the Torah is impressing upon us the importance of following the middle path. While we are required to do our utmost to avoid the temptations of indulgence, we must not do so by completely withdrawing from the pleasures of this world. The Torah does not favour extremism in either direction. As it is said, (Devarim 5:29) "And you shall be watchful to do as HaShem your God has commanded you, do not stray to the right or to the left." Do not act liberally with respect to Torah and mitzvos, but be not overly conservative in your observance.

This idea is also supported linguistically as the words chosen for these two diametrically opposite individuals are in fact quite similar. As Rashi (5:12) explains, the basic understanding of the word sotah is one who turns away, deviates from the path of modesty and from her responsibilities as a married individual. Nazir, as well, means one who is separated. Not only has he detached himself from this-worldly pleasures, he has removed himself from the conventional ways of the world. Indeed, the Torah has classified both of these individuals as deviants of sorts.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka

WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
Dikdukian: Aleph's and Ayin's

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Shavuos

2026-05-21T09:57:47.634-04:00

In the same shiur I referenced last week for the shtikle on Bemdibar, I heard a beautiful thought on Megillas Rus from R’ Avigdor Nebenzahl. Rus’s lineage traces back to some well-known characters in the Torah. We read about Rus to highlight her triumphant journey from a member of the nation of Moav to her conversion and ultimately becoming the great grandmother of David HaMelech. Perhaps the most dramatic exchange occurs when Rus resists all of Na’ami’s attempts to convince her to return to her nation. She declares (1:16-17) “Where you shall go, I shall go. Where you sleep, I will sleep. Your nation is my nation and your God is my God. Where you will die, I will die and there I will be buried.”

R' Nebenzahl explains that with each phrase, Rus was seeking to correct a deed from ancestral past. “Where you go, I will go” is meant to negate the actions of her forefather Lot, who chose to go to Sedom when his entourage was forced to separate from that of Avraham. “Where you sleep, I will sleep” is a reference to the actions of his daughters which, although well-intentioned, required correction. “Your nation is my nation” is a rejection of Balak who dismissed B'nei Yisrael (Bemidbar 22:5) as merely a nation that had left Egypt. "Your God is my God" rejects the actions of the women of Moav who seduced B'nei Yisrael into idol worship.

“Where you will die, I will die” harkens back to the demise of Lot’s father Haran. The midrash recounts that he waited to see what would happen to Avraham when he got thrown into the furnace at Ur Kasdim. He chose to follow him not out of conviction but simply because he saw he survived. Haran, due to his lack of true faith, did not. Finally, "there I will be buried" recalls the demise of Lot's wife who was turned into a pillar of salt and did not merit a burial.

Have a chag samei'ach and good Shabbos!

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Shavuos takes it on the chin... or under the shin

Dikdukian: Letzeis and On top of Old Smokey

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Bemidbar

2026-05-15T12:10:54.928-04:00

Towards the end of this week's parsha, the Torah (3:44-51) details a redemption process that affected an exchange between the firstborn of the nation at large and the Leviim who were now assigned to the holy service in their stead. There was a direct exchange between 22,000 first born and 22,000 Leviim. But one problem remained. The firstborn totaled 22,273. A separate process was employed for the extra first born which consisted of a 5-shekel payment, to be distributed "le'Aharon ulvanav." Intuitively, one might assume that the money was split 3 ways between Aharaon, Elazar and Isamar. However, the gemara (Bava Basra 143a) relates that le'Aharon ulvanav indicates one half going to Aharon and the other half going to the sons.

(I heard in a shiur last night:) Meshech Chachmah provides a brilliant proof that this is how this money was divided. We find the shekel being used at various different times. In some instances, we are told that the shekel was the value of 20 geirah. But in some instances we are not. The pattern is as follows: if the shekel in question is going to be broken up, such as in the case of the half shekel used for the census (Shemos 30:13), we need to know the value in a smaller denomination. However, when it comes to arachin, as discussed at the end of Vayikra (Vayikra 27), only whole shekalim are used and so we do not need to be told that it was 20 geirah. Only later (27:25) when the redemption of land is discussed and fractions are heavily involved are once again reminded.

In our specific case, it is once again mentioned (3:47) that the shekel is 20 geirah. Now, the total collected for the 273 extra firstborn would be 273 x 5 = 1,365 total shekalim. That number is evenly divisible by 3. If each individual were to receive a third, they would be given 455 shekalim even. There would be no need to mention 20 geirah. But since 1,365 is an odd number, dividing by 2 would result in each receiving 682 ½ shekalim. So it follows that the Torah would mention 20 geirah.

Have a good Shabbos and chodesh tov.

Eliezer Bulka

WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Al Pi Cheshbon: No Population Increase

Al Pi Cheshbon: Tens and Ones by Ari Brodsky

Al Pi Cheshbon: Rounded Numbers

Al Pi Cheshbon: Discrepency in Levi's Population

Al Pi Cheshbon: Explaining the Uncounted Levi'im

Al Pi Cheshbon: Pidyon HaBen Probability

Dikdukian: Be or Ba?

Dikdukian: Discussions on Bemidbar by Eliyahu Levin

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Behar / Bechukosai

2026-05-08T17:19:10.113-04:00

This Sunday, 23 Iyar, marks the 16^th yahrtzeit of my great aunt, Lady Amélie Jakobovits, a"h. The shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmasah, Mayla bas Eliyahu.

Tuesday, the 25th of Iyar, marks the 25^th yahrtzeit of my mother, a"h. The shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmasah, Tzirel Nechamah bas Tovia Yehudah.

This week's parsha begins with the promise of the blessings for those who follow the ways of the Torah. There are two conditions given: im bechukosai teileichu, and es mitzvosai tishmeru. Rashi's comment is a common subject for discussion. Bechukosai teileichu refers to toiling in the study of Torah. However, we must certainly be sure to toil enough to realize that there are in fact two conditions. Indeed, there is only one instance of the word im, if, in the pasuk. This would appear to indicate that one must accomplish both conditions to be deserving of the blessings. We must toil in the study of Torah but also fulfill the mitzvos diligently. Contrarily, the mirroring pasuk which introduces the curses contains two instances of im. If we falter in either of these two categories, there are grave consequences.

To put it in computer logic terms for those for whom it is helpful:

if ((bechukosai_teileichu) && (mitzvosai_tishmeru))

getBerachos();

else

getKelalos(); // Chas veShalom

However, even if one is able to accomplish the two conditions, there is still a delicate balance that must be met. This is where the haftarah connects with the parsha. In Pirkei Avos, Perek 3 (Mishna 17) R' Elazar ben Azaria teaches what is arguably the paradigmatic lesson of all of Pirkei Avos. One whose wisdom and knowledge is greater than his deeds is like a tree whose branches are greater than its roots, lacking support and easily toppled over. One whose deeds are greater, however, is like a tree whose roots are greater in number than its branches, providing support against all sorts of nasty conditions. The pesukim used to illustrate this are from this week's haftarah (Yirmeyahu 17:5-8). "And he shall be as a tree by the waters..." (Interestingly, the navi is clearly contrasting someone who puts his trust in man with someone who places his trust solely in HaShem. R' Elazar ben Azaria seems to borrow this imagery from its clear application in Tana”ch and apply it to one whose deeds are greater than his wisdom.) Nevertheless, these pesukim, as understood by R' Elazar ben Azaria, establish a direct connection between the parsha and the haftarah.

Chazak, chazak, venischazeik!

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Life as we Know It

Dikdukian: Hearing Los

Dikdukian: How Lo Can You Go?

Dikdukian: Even Lo-er

Dikdukian: Qualification of the AHOY rule
Al Pi Cheshbon: An Ironic Observation

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Emor

2026-05-01T17:41:14.553-04:00

Parshas Emor always falls in the middle of sefiras ha'omer and it is also the parsha which contains the commandment for sefiras ha'omer (23:15). This unique mitzvah seems to give rise the most interesting halachic discussions ranging from the theoretical, such as counting the Omer in alternative number bases, to the more practical, such as the effect of crossing the International Date Line on the fulfillment of the mitzvah. There is an interesting discussion as to whether or not writing may qualify as a valid means of fulfilling the mitzvah of sefiras ha'omer. That is, if one was to write, "Hayom yom ֹ𝑥 la'omer," would that be sufficient to fulfill one's obligation and would this action disallow one from repeating the count with a berachah?

The discussion of this halachic quandary trickles down a family tree. This issue is first dealt with in the responsa of R' Akiva Eiger, siman 29. The teshuvah is actually written by R' Akiva Eiger's uncle, R' Wolf Eiger. Unable to attend his nephew's wedding, he made a simultaneous banquet of his own to celebrate the occasion. He wrote to his nephew about this halachic issue, which was discussed at the banquet. He cites a number of related issues which he builds together to try to reach a conclusion. The gemara (Yevamos 31b, Gittin 71a) teaches that witnesses may only testify by means of their mouths and not by writing. The gemara (Shabbos 153b) states that mutes should not separate terumah because they cannot say the berachah. It is assumed that writing the berachah would not have been sufficient. Also, there is a discussion among the commentaries with regards to the validity of a vow that is written and not recited. R' Wolf Eiger concludes that writing is not a sufficient means of fulfilling the mitzvah of sefiras ha'omer. However, this sparks a debate between him and his nephew which stretches out to siman 32.

This issue is eventually discussed in the responsa of Kesav Sofer (Yoreh Dei'ah siman 106) by R' Avraham Shmuel Binyomin Sofer, R' Akiva Eiger's grandson who was, in fact, named after R' Wolf Eiger. He covers a host of related topics and eventually discusses the exchange recorded in his grandfather's sefer. The debate, although it encompasses various pertinent issues, never produces any concrete proof directly concerning the act of counting. However, Kesav Sofer quotes his father, Chasam Sofer, in his footnotes to R' Akiva Eiger (his father- in-law) where he provides a more concrete proof. The gemara (Yoma 22b) teaches that one who counts the number of B'nei Yisrael transgresses a prohibition as it is written (Hoshea 2:1) "And the number of B'nei Yisrael shall be like the sand of the sea that shall not be measured nor counted." The gemara cites two examples (Shmuel I 11:8, 15:4) where Shaul HaMelech went out of his way to avoid this prohibition by using pieces of clay or rams in order to perform a census. Chasam Sofer suggests that Shaul could simply have counted the men by writing down the numbers and not saying them. Since Shaul went to far greater lengths, we are compelled to say that writing the number of men would still have qualified as counting them and he would not have sufficiently dodged the prohibition. Thus, concludes Chasam Sofer, if one has explicit intention to fulfill the mitzvah, writing is a valid means of counting Sefiras HaOmer. However, Kesav Sofer suggests that perhaps the berachah should not be recited in this case.

It's hard to imagine what the practical implications might have been in those days. Why would someone write down the day of the omer if not for the fact that they were completely unable to talk. However, perhaps this issue has more practical implications in our modern age. Suppose someone sends his friend a text message asking what night of sefirah it is and he responds, "tonight is 6." Perhaps there might be a problem counting with a berachah after that?

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Ner Tamid

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Tazria / Metzora

2026-04-17T18:44:21.283-04:00

The main topic of this week's parshios, Tazria and Metzora is the sickness known as tzara'as. Tazria deals mainly with the assessment of tzara'as. In Metzora, we begin to discuss the recovery process. We find that a metzora must bring two birds after his tzara'as has gone away (14:4). One of the birds is slaughtered and the other is sent away. Why?

Rashi there writes that the reason why birds are brought is because they talk a lot and the reason why one becomes afflicted with tzara'as is because he spoke leshon hara. Be'er Moshe, in the introduction to chelek 3 of his teshuvos, (as well as a number of other commentaries,) explains that the slaughtering of the bird is to symbolize how we must be aware of when to keep our mouths shut and to prevent whatever negative words we were going to say. However, the most complete way to battle leshon hara is not by complete verbal repression. One must be able to speak normally, using his mouth for good, for divrei Torah. He must be able to converse with individuals but in a way that he watches his words and doesn't say anything wrong. Therefore, the second bird is sent out into the world symbolizing how one is supposed to go out and talk naturally, but the bird is first dipped in the blood of the dead bird, to show how he must always keep in mind his responsibilities to refrain from speaking evil.

The Chofetz Chaim encountered numerous challenges trying to get haskamos for his sefer on leshon hara. On one occasion, he was given a test where someone engaged him in conversation for 6 hours on all sorts of issues of the day. Yet, any time the conversation would gravitate towards the denigration of individuals, he would put a quick end to it. Indeed, the Chofetz Chaim was the true embodiment of the above.

See also this year's offering from Noam Jacobson. He points out that many of the procedures that the metzora follows resemble those of aveilus. As we are told, someone who contracts tzara'as is compared to one who has died. Indeed, part of him has. The two birds symbolize these two aspects of the metzora himself – the part of him that died and the part that has survived and is now integrating back into society.

Have a good Shabbos and chodesh tov.

Eliezer Bulka

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: White Hair

Dikdukian: Meaning of "kibus" by Eliyahu Levin

Dikdukian: Various Dikduk Observations by Eliyahu Levin

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Pesach and the Final Days

2026-04-06T22:51:35.424-04:00

As the loss of Rabbi Moshe Hauer, z"l, is still a fresh wound for many of us, I felt it would be appropriate to quote a beautiful thought I heard in a shiur from him a number of years ago.

While refraining from all leavened products for a week or so always proves to be quite the undertaking, in the Beis HaMikdash, it was the norm, with only a few exceptions. As we read a number of weeks ago, we are told (Vaikra 2:11) that all minchah offerings must be free of any leaven or sweetener. Allegorically, we find in the gemara (Berachos 17a) that se'or, leaven, is commonly associated with the yeitzer hara. However, Netziv in Haamek Davar offers another understanding of se'or and why it is forbidden on the mizbei'ach and relates it to Pesach as well.

The process of making bread will always require a significant degree of human contribution to process wheat into flour and then dough and then to bake it. However, the addition of a leavening agent represents an added degree of meddling with the natural process to alter the final product. (Those of us whose family has recently taken up the hobby of sourdough baking are certainly quite familiar with this reality.) The complete absence of all leaven represents the refraining from trying to inject our own intervention to manipulate the nature that HaShem has put in place, rather than letting things take their own Divine path.

Certainly, in the beis hamikdash, where our primary goal is to become closer to HaShem, it is appropriate to minimize our own machinations and submit ourselves to the will of HaShem. That is why leaven is not appropriate. As Netziv continues to explain, this is similarly the theme of the yom tov of Pesach – the rooting of emunah in HaShem in the collective hearts of our nation. With very little action on our part, we were witnesses to unimaginable miracles leading to our exodus from Mitzrayim.

Rabbi Hauer, z"l, (audio link, start at 24:38 mark) discusses this idea in a shiur on Netziv and extrapolates it to extend throughout Pesach to the last days of yom tov when we commemorate the splitting of Yam Suf. There too, amidst all of the panic in the wake of the steadily advancing Egyptian army at the apparent dead end, Moshe commands the nation (Shemos 14:13) not to fear but rather, to simply stand and witness HaShem's great deliverance. What better time to drive home this message for the ages than the end of a full week without any bread.

Have a chag samei'ach.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
Al Pi Cheshbon: Omer Counting in Different Bases

Dikdukian: Exceptions Ahoy!

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Leil Seder

2026-04-01T13:34:24.075-04:00

(Apologies for not getting this out in time for the Israeli readers.) I originally posted this thought 12 years ago, following the Bar Mitzvah of a cousin who is named after my great uncle, Rabbi Lord Immanuel Jakobovits, z"l. I could not resist the timing as this same cousin has just concluded sheva berachos following his wedding last week.

I heard a very beautiful insight which is perfect for seder night. My cousin, Dr. Yoel Jakobovits, described how they recently discovered some unpublished notes from his father, Rabbi Lord Immanuel Jakobovits, z"l. This was one of the gems found therein.

We lead into Pesach with the haftarah of Shabbas HaGadol which ends with the tidings of the ultimate redemption and the arrival of Eliyahu HaNavi. In the gemara we find a number of references to Eliyahu's role in resolving disputes when that great day does come. In unresolved halachic matters the gemara will state teiku. Although the word does have an actual meaning in Aramaic, it is traditionally said to stand for Tishbi yetareitz kushyos ubaayos, Eliyahu (HaTishbi) will resolve the matter. In monetary matters we often find hashaar yehei munach ad sheyavo Eliyahu, the money that is subject to dispute will be placed aside until Eliyahu comes and resolves the matter.

Lord Jakobovits explains why this role falls upon Eliyahu. It can be fairly safely stated that Eliyahu's defining moment was the showdown with the prophets of Ba'al at Har HaCarmel. He showed unwavering faith as he took on the masses, putting his life and everything he believed in on the line. But in addition to standing up to the staunch believers on the opposing side, he challenged the rest of the nation to quit sitting on the fence and waiting to jump on one bandwagon or the other. He demanded, with his timeless words, (Melachim I 18:21) "ad masai atem posechim al shnei haseipim," how long will you continue to waver between the two opinions? (Note the connection to Pesach with the use of the same word.) With this, Eliyahu earned the eternal role as the resolver of doubt.

But while we yearn for Eliyahu to be called upon to fulfill this role in the ultimate redemption, we find that Eliyahu makes various "appearances" in our times. Notably, many of these visits seem to involve children. Eliyahu is known as the mal'ach haBris and we have a seat for him at each one. On the night of the seder, when there is so much focus on transmitting the stories and traditions to our children, Eliyahu visits once again. There is a connection. Lord Jakobovits posits that our children represent the essence of safeik, doubt. While we adults are, for the most part, set in our ways, the direction our children's lives might take very much hangs in the balance. We are tasked with shaping and molding them into the characters we would like them to become and we need the guidance of Eliyahu HaNavi to guide us on this mission.

Have a chag kasher ve'sameiach and a good Shabbos!

For a collection of previous seder night shtikles, please check out my archive of past Seder shtikles.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Hagieinu vs Yagieinu

Dikdukian: Chad Gadya

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Vayikra

2026-03-20T17:00:00.000-04:00

Today, 2 Nissan, marks the 20^th yahrtzeit of my Bubbie. This week's shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmasah, Yehudis bas Reuven Pinchas.

This coming Sunday, 4 Nissan, marks the 8^th yahrtzeit of my wife's grandmother, Rebbetzin Faigie Frankel. This week's shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmasah, Leah Feiga bas Aharon Tzvi.

This week's parsha deals with a number of different versions of the korban chatas, the sin offering. The sin offering of the nasi is introduced in a slightly different way than the others. The other versions of the chatas offering are introduced with the word (ve)'im, and if... The nasi's chatas, however, is introduced (4:22) with the word asher, when the nasi sins.

Rabbeinu Bachya approaches this linguistic discrepancy in the simplest manner. He writes that it is the nature of a man in a position of power to be consumed by haughtiness and hubris which is most likely to lead to sin. So, while the sin of others is introduced more indefinitely, "if it would happen to be that a person were to sin," the sin of the nasi is introduced almost as a certainty.

Rashi provides a more homiletic interpretation of the word asher from the midrash. Asher is like ashrei, praised. The pasuk is actually giving praise to the nasi, not for committing the sin, God forbid, but for having the integrity to come forth and admit it. After all, without the admission there would be no sacrifice. The high public position makes it all the more embarrassing to admit guilt. Praised is the generation whose nasi swallows that embarrassment and has the gumption to do what is required of him.

Malbim offers another positive approach related to that of Rashi's. The words asher and im are actually interchangeable (see Rashi Rosh HaShanah 3a). There is one slight difference between the word im and the word asher, used to mean im. The word asher is used to denote a possibility which we would like to occur while im simply implies a possibility. The best example of this is in parshas Re'eih. The parsha begins by explaining what will trigger the blessings and the curses. The pasuk states (Devarim 11:27) "Es haberachah asher tishme'u... (pasuk 28) vehakelalah im lo sishme'u." The translation is the same for both, if you will listen or if you will not listen. However, since listening is what we want to happen, the word asher is used whereas the word im is used for not listening. Here, too, we want the nasi to be one who will come forth and admit his sins. It is his position of power and influence that makes it most important for him to possess this quality. Therefore, the Torah introduces his sin offering with the word asher.

Have a good Shabbos and chodesh tov.
Mishenichnas Adar Marbim beSimchah (see Rashi, bottom of Taanis 29a)

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
Dikdukian: Keves vs. Kesev

Dikdukian: Birkas HaIlanos

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Vayakheil / Pekudei

2026-03-13T06:30:00.001-04:00

In this week's parsha, (35:30-35) Moshe Rabbeinu informs B'nei Yisrael that Betzalel will be in charge of overseeing the construction of the mishkan. He states that HaShem has instilled in him a special spirit of wisdom and understanding. After explaining this wisdom in more detail, Moshe adds (35:34) "ulhoros nasan belibo," and He has placed in his heart the ability or desire to teach. It was not sufficient for Betzalel to be familiar with all the crafts necessary for the construction of the mishkan. He needed to be able to teach it to others so that they may participate as well.

In examining this pasuk more thoroughly, there are two very important lessons that are taught in this seemingly simple phrase. The first is that no wealth of knowledge ever guarantees the ability to teach. Betzalel was brought to the highest levels of knowledge and understanding but that was not enough. In addition to the wisdom vested in him by HaShem he also required a separate Divine inspiration for the ability to give over that wisdom to others. The art of teaching is a necessary wisdom unto itself. This point is made by Ohr HaChayim and R' Moshe Shternbuch on this pasuk.

This pasuk also teaches us that while one might attribute other areas of wisdom to the brain or mind, the essence of teaching is in the heart. It is not even enough for one to spend day and night studying and learning how to teach. No matter how much knowledge one is able to place in his brain, without a teaching heart it just does not work. Therefore, in addition to enriching Betzalel's intellect with the wisdom and knowledge to perform all the necessary tasks, HaShem instilled in him all the necessary components to make the training process as smooth as possible. (In truth, it has been noted that throughout Tana"ch, we don't find a separate word used to refer to the brain. So lev would also cover matters of pure intellect and this second inference is not so strong.)

Chazak, chazak, venishchazeik!

Have a good Shabbos.

Mishenichnas Adar Marbim beSimchah!

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: A Wise Correction

Dikdukian: Ve'asa Vetzalel

Dikdukian: Kikar Zahav

Dikdukian: The Lord and the Rings

Dikdukian: Tarshish Shoham

Dikdukian: Sham and Shamah

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Ki Sisa

2026-03-06T15:18:00.000-05:00

I heard the following recently from a shiur by R' Asher Weiss. There is a famous approach attributed to Ramba"n (20:12) regarding the aseres hadibros. With the obvious exception of the commandment to respect one's father and mother, the first half of the dibros are very distinctly confined to matters bein adam laMakom – between Man and his Maker. The second half quite conversely deals with matters between Man and his neighbour.

In our parsha, when the luchos are given to Moshe (31:18) the word luchos is written without a vuv, as if it is singular – luchas. Rashi comments that this nuance is meant to indicate that they were equivalent. Rashi, however, does not elaborate as to what the nature of this equivalence is. R' Asher Weiss suggests these two ideas may be fused together. The dibros could have been delivered on one slab of stone. Why was it necessary to split them into two? It is never sufficient to be especially diligent regarding mitzvos bein adam laMakom while being lax in matters with other people. Nor is the inverse acceptable. Both realms of Torah observance are absolutely necessary to achieve any level of completeness in the service of HaShem. This idea is expressed further in the events that followed the giving of the luchos.

When Moshe comes down from the mountain and observes the devastating situation that had unfolded (32:19) he throws down both luchos in anger. The pasuk, as we read it, states that he threw them from his hands. However, the word yadav is written without a second vuv, as if it is to be read to miyado, from his one hand. R' Yisroel Salanter explains that when Moshe observed the golden calf, it was abundantly clear that the nation had failed in their observance of the first tablet. They directly disobeyed the commandment not to have other gods. But Moshe had a notion that perhaps they could still maintain their connection to the second half of the dibros. But HaShem made it such that both were thrown down and destroyed to bring home this notion – that there is no such thing as observing one half of the covenant with HaShem while ignoring the other. If one part goes down, it all comes down.

Have a good Shabbos.

Mishenichnas Adar Marbim beSimchah!

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Kol Annnos

Dikdukian: Yeiaseh vs.Taaseh by Ephraim Stulberg

Dikdukian: No More Drinking

Dikdukian: Minimizing Sin

Dikdukian: Whys and Wherefores

Dikdukian: Need to Bring this Up

Dikdukian: Oops (Parah)

Dikdukian: Let Your Heart Not be Desolate (Parah)

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Purim

2026-03-03T02:16:00.000-05:00

By now I'm sure most of you have seen or read all sorts of inspiring thoughts making the obvious connection between the events of the day and the story of the megillah. (One clever observation I saw from Noam Jacobson highlighted the fact that the Iranian regime was the epitome of a Haman, more so than any of the numerous individuals and nations who sought to obliterate us over the generations. They all had elaborate schemes which would certainly take years to carry out. Only the Iranians, with their nuclear ambitions, sought to carry out an instantaneous genocide – beyom echad – as Haman did.)

This morning, I noticed a much different historical context in the story of Purim. As is well-known and much discussed, there is a deep connection, albeit ironic, between Purim and Yom HaKippurim. It begins with the similarity of the name and goes off in many different directions. On Yom Kippur, we read the story of Yonah who was commanded to inform the great city of Nineveh that they were to be destroyed for their wicked deeds. One of the common understandings of Yonah's reluctance to deliver this prophecy is that he was afraid that if the gentile city of Nineveh were to repent – as they, in fact, did – it would reflect drastically upon the Jews of the time who seemed resistant to the many rebukes from the prophets.

Perhaps Yonah's reasoning was virtuous and even justified, if looked at merely in the context of the present day. But a line in the selichos for Taanis Esther reveals what the flaw in his approach might have been in the greater context of Jewish history. In the first selichah, as we poetically retell the story of Purim, we recount that they learned the lesson from Nineveh that through teshuvah and tefillah, we can annul a most devastating decree.

Even if the teshuvah of Nineveh had negative consequences for the Jews of the time, it served as a blueprint for future generations to inspire them to never lose hope to achieve salvation through prayer and repentance. And the inclusion in the selichos is surely a call to all further generations – including our own – to never lose hope in the most trying times and to always have faith in the power of our deeds and our words to bring deliverance to our nation.

Have a Purim sameiach!
Mishenichnas Adar marbim be'simchah

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Please see my Purim archives for some more insightful (hopefully not inciteful) thoughts on Purim.

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Dikdukian Posts on Megillas Esther

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Tetzaveh / Purim

2026-02-27T15:42:00.000-05:00

Last Thursday, 2 Adar, was the 20^th yahrtzeit of my Zadie, Rabbi Yaakov Bulka. The shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmaso, Chaim Yaakov ben Yitzchak, z"l.

As part of the process of producing the priestly vestments, pasuk 28:40 commands, "Velivnei Aharon ta'ase chutanos", and for the sons of Aharon you shall make tunics. This can be interpreted in two ways - one tunic for each kohein or many tunics for each kohein. This is the subject of a dispute in the Yerushalmi (Yoma 3:6). Rabanan are of the opinion that it was two tunics for each kohein while the position of R' Yose is one tunic for each kohein suffices.

In the gemara (Megillah 7a) Rav Yosef learns that when it says in Megillas Esther matanos la'evyonim, it means 2 total matanos for 2 evyonim - only one for each poor person. Turei Even in Chagiga and Avnei Shoham in Megilla (same author) comment that this gemara goes like R' Yose in the Yerushalmi who holds one tunic for each kohein. However, asks Mitzpeh Eisan in Megillah, from Tosafos (Chagiga 3a) we see that the halachah in regards to the dispute in the Yerushalmi is like the Rabanan - two tunics for each kohein. If Rav Yosef in Megilla is going only according to R' Yose then it is not in accordance with halachah. But his ruling is uncontested.

Mitzpeh Eisan answers from Pri Chadash (Orach Chaim 694) who writes that if the pasuk had written "vela'evyonim matanos" then it would have implied two to each but now that it says it the other way around it only means one to each. Therefore, the rule is that if the subject is written before the object then it may imply that to these plural subjects you will give plural objects to each. That then is the subject of dispute in Yerushalmi where the pasuk in question is "Velivnei Aharon ta'ase chutanos", the subject coming before the object. However, with matanos la'evyonim where the object comes first, it means that these objects shall be distributed amongst the following subjects and everyone will agree that it is one per person. [This also explains why the gemara in Yoma entertains the possibility that there were two lots on each goat in the Yom Kippur procedure because the pasuk states, "al shnei hase'irim goralos," the subject before the object.]

Have a good Shabbos.

Mishenichnas Adar Marbim beSimchah!

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Dikdukian Posts on Megillas Esther

Dikdukian: Ner Tamid

Dikdukian: Of Plurals and Singulars

Dikdukian: The Lord and the Rings

Dikdukian: Tarshsih veShoham

Dikdukian: Sham and Shamah

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Mishpatim

2026-02-13T16:48:00.000-05:00

This past Tuesday, 23 Shevat, marked the 5^th yahrtzeit of my Oma Jakobovits. The shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmasah, Chayah Sarah bas Zechariah Chaim, z"l.

This coming Sunday, 28 Shevat, marks the 13^th yahrtzeit of my wife's grandfather, R' Yitzchak Yeres. The shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmaso, Yitzchak Chaim ben Moshe Yosef HaLevi, z"l.

In this week's parsha, we are commanded to come to the aid of our fellow Jew whose donkey is crouching under his burden and needs help to load it on. The Torah chooses a rather interesting way of delivering this mitzvah. The pasuk reads simply (23:5) "If you shall see the donkey of someone you hate crouching beneath his burden and you refrain from aiding him, you shall surely aid him."

The first point to consider is that the Torah presents the case of a donkey belonging to one who is hated, rather than just anyone. We learn from here that if we are faced with two such situations, one involving a friend and one involving an enemy, the Torah commands us to help out the one whom you hate first in order to suppress your instinctual enmity and force a friendship to be made.

The second puzzling part of the pasuk is the seemingly gratuitous phrase "vechadalta mei'azov lo," and you will refrain from helping him. What does the Torah mean by this phrase? The gemara learns from here that there are times when you are in fact expected not to help out. For instance, if one is elderly and it is not respectful or if he is a kohein and the donkey is in a cemetery. However, this does not seem to fit as the simple reading of the pasuk. Rashi writes that it is a rhetorical question, "should you refrain from helping him?!" However, it is also difficult to understand the pasuk in this way.

R' Chaim Kanievsky writes in Ta'ama D'kra that the purpose of this phrase is connected to the initial lesson learned from the pasuk. The Torah tells you to help out your enemy in order to break your hatred. This would therefore only apply if under normal circumstances you would not have helped him. Thus, the pasuk is understood as follows: When you see your enemy's donkey and, under normal circumstances you would have neglected to help him, then and only then do you help him before your friend. If you would have helped him anyway then there is no reason he should take precedence over your friend.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup

Dikdukian: Tricky Vowels

Dikdukian: Answer vs. Torture
Dikdukian: Give it to me
Dikdukian: Ha'isha viladeha

Dikdukian: Jewish Milk

Dikdukian: Three Strikes and you're out

Dikdukian: The Ox and his Friend

Al Pi Cheshbon: 10,000 Kikars

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Yisro

2026-02-06T16:31:00.000-05:00

As Matan Torah approaches, HaShem ensures Moshe (19:9) that with this great event, B'nei Yisrael "will believe in you forever." The difficulty with this promise is that we have already seen that with the splitting of the sea (14:31) "they believed in HaShem and in Moshe his servant." Why does Moshe need to be assured once again of B'nei Yisrael's trust?

Ramban here and Rambam (Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah 8) explain along similar lines that the mere witnessing of great miracles still did not accomplish complete belief in Moshe's prophecy for there was still room to suspect witchcraft of some sort. They had never actually witnessed the actual procedure of prophecy. The events at Har Sinai showed not only Moshe heeding HaShem's word but HaShem actually commanding Moshe directly, to which all of B'nei Yisroel were witness. Now there was certainly no room for any doubt whatsoever in the authenticity of Moshe's prophecy.

One of the most prevalent proofs offered by common kiruv organizations as to the authenticity of Judaism over other religions is based on these events. Many religions feature a figure who claimed to have been in contact with God. Their religion is based largely on these prophecies.

The Rosh HaYeshiva of Ner Yisroel, HaRav Yaakov Weinberg zt"l offered a famous joke found in an old Hebrew joke book as a parable to prove the futility of this belief:

A certain Rabbi passed away and left two sons who argued over which was to be their father's successor. One day one of the sons gathered all the elders of the community and proclaimed that his father had come to him in a dream and told him that he wants him to be his successor. The elders, rather impressed by this revelation, were just about to appoint him rabbi when one man objected from the back, "Excuse me, but if your father really wanted us to appoint you rabbi, then he would have come to us in our dream!"

All the other religions choose to believe in the prophecy of one man. But why? So-and-so says he spoke to God. Why should you believe him? Only the Jews are different. Every single Jew stood at the foot of Har Sinai and witnessed HaShem talking to Moshe with their very own eyes and ears. This is a level of belief that is irrefutable. Also, due to its foundation upon nationwide testimony, it is a claim that could not possibly be fabricated. This explains why none of the other religions have ever dared make such a claim.

With this we can understand that the promise given here to Moshe was not about whether or not B'nei Yisrael believed in his prophecy. This was already established earlier. Rather it was a promise of the longevity and perseverance of this belief – "vegam becha ya'aminu le'olam." A prophet who performs miracles may convince his generation to believe in him, but who will believe it in the generations to come? With the awesome events at Har Sinai, the belief in Moshe Rabbeinu's supreme prophecy became one that is sure to be everlasting and could never be challenged.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka

WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: By the Thousands

Dikdukian: Many Who Fear God

Dikdukian: Letzais

Dikdukian: On top of Old Smokey

Dikdukian: Ram veNisa by Eliyahu Levin

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Beshalach

2026-01-30T16:54:00.000-05:00

As the Egyptians realized they were doomed when their chariots began to collapse in the middle of Yam Suf, they proclaimed (14:25) "Let us flee from the Israelites for HaShem is fighting for them in Egypt!" At least, this is the simple literal understanding of what they said. But the last phrase is very puzzling. They were not in Egypt. HaShem wasn't fighting their battle in Egypt. Rashi starts by interpreting the word beMitzrayim as really meaning baMitzriyim, not in Egypt but with the Egyptians. That solves the problem rather simply.

He then brings another, less direct approach from the Mechilta. Just as those who in the sea were being smitten, so too those who remained in Egypt were being simultaneously smitten.

However, the Targum Onkelos on this pasuk is rather intriguing. He writes that the Egyptians were declaring that this was the same Strong Hand of God that fought B'nei Yisrael's battles in Egypt. A polytheistic belief system, such as that to which the Egyptians subscribed, is forced to attribute boundaries to their deities by some sort of criteria such as location, time or specific strength. As much as the Egyptians recognized HaShem's Hand in the meting out of the ten plagues, they still did not appreciate our monotheistic beliefs. It would seem from this pasuk that they believed that HaShem's powers were somehow confined to Egypt. They chased B'nei Yisrael with the belief that His Mighty Hand would not reach them outside of those boundaries. When they witnessed the miraculous collapse of their chariots, they finally began to realize their error. They recognized that the God who brought their nation to its knees on its home turf knows no boundaries and was now bringing them to their ultimate demise.

(I'm not 100% sure I have accurately understood the tense of the targum. But I believe the idea is valid independently, as well.)

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Happy 19th Birthday, Dikdukian!

Dikdukian: Ba'al Tzefon

Dikdukian: Exceptions Ahoy

Dikdukian: Midash, HaShem...

Dikdukian: Leave us Alone

Al Pi Cheshbon: Chamushim

AstroTorah: The Gemara's Aliens? by R' Ari Storch

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Bo

2026-01-23T16:02:00.000-05:00

This week's shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmas Dovid Pesach ben Tzvi Hirsh HaLevi whose 6^th yahrtzeit is this coming tomorrow, 6 Shevat.

I wrote the following 7 years ago as an observation regarding a raging political battle related to illegal immigration. Not a lot has changed since then:

Without getting too deep in the political weeds, one way to understand the dispute is a disagreement as to whether or not certain individuals are desired as residents of this country. Shall we build a wall to keep out all but those who wish to enter through fully legal means? Or is it proper to let anyone in who wants to enter? What shall be done with those who have already managed to enter illegally? Every nation needs to devote significant thought to the issue of whom they want to let in and at times, even consider those who are already there and whether they should remain.

There were certainly many facets to the subjugation in Mitzrayim and the subsequent redemption. This national issue was very much part of the story line. At the very beginning of Shemos, we learn about Paroah's convention to decide what to do about their "Jewish problem." One must assume that expulsion was an option that was on the table, in theory. Many nations throughout history have certainly had no qualms about that course of action. It seems from the dialog that "ve'alah min ha'aretz," mass emigration was not a desirable result. This strategy dates back even further to Paroah's clear apprehensions with the journey to bury Yaakov Avinu in Eretz Yisrael. And so, it was decided that the best strategy – not unlike that of the Soviet Union – was to keep, contain and subjugate them.

As the mission towards deliverance begins, the dialogue consists primarily of Moshe trying to convince Paroah to let B'nei Yisrael leave for B'nei Yisrael's sake, not the sake of Paroah or Mitzrayim. However, after the attrition of the initial seven plagues, at the beginning of this week's parsha, we begin to see a shift. After Paroah stubbornly ignores Moshe's warning about the locusts, his closest courtiers have had enough and insist (10:7) that he let them go. We all know how that turned out.

Later, in the preamble to the ultimate plague of makas bechoros, Moshe foretells (11:8) that these servants would give up on convincing their ruler and come to Moshe on their own and beg him to leave. Sure enough, as the events played out, Paroah himself came to Moshe and Aharon and the entire nation eventually came to the realization that under no circumstances could the nation sustain B'nei Yisrael remaining in their midst. Finally, we were given the one expulsion in our history that we were actually longing for.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
Dikdukian: Talented Locusts

Dikdukian: Better not Butcher This One

AstroTorah: Korban Pesach in the Sky by R' Ari Storch

AstroTorah: The Death Star (Ra'ah) the classic by R' Ari Storch

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Va'eira

2026-01-16T16:39:00.001-05:00

In this week's parsha, the story is briefly paused for a condensed review of the generations leading from the sons of Yaakov to the main players in the story. The pesukim review the children of Reuven and Shimon and then the progeny of Levi in order to reach Aharon and Moshe. One of the subtle differences between the review of Reuven and Shimon and that of Levi is that the former are introduced with (6:14) "The sons of…" Levi, however, is introduced with (6:16) "These are the names of the sons…"

I recently heard a shiur from Rabbi Frand in which he quotes the Shelah (Shenei Luchos HaBeris) who addresses this nuance. He writes that Levi saw with ruach hakodesh that the nation would be enslaved by Egypt but his descendants would not be subjected to the harsh subjugation like the rest of the people. He wanted to ensure that his offspring did not lack the sensitivity to commiserate with the rest of the nation. He therefore gave them names that would serve as a constant reminder of their predicament. Gershon is named for the fact that they were strangers in the land. Kehas is derived from the word indicating that their teeth were blunted and Merari's name was reminiscent of the bitter conditions.

Rabbi Frand goes on to explain that Levi's mission was surely accomplished. When he is tending the flock of Yisro, he is captivated by the burning bush and comes closer to observe. Traditionally, based on the midrash, the bush symbolized the Jewish people. As much as they were mistreated and persecuted, they are still never consumed. This is what caught Moshe's attention. It is unclear at what age Moshe left Egypt but by all accounts, this was over 60 years after he had fled. Still, after all these years, his people were top of mind.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Plurals and Singulars

Dikdukian: Netziv and the Missing Yud

Dikdukian: The Strange thing about Frogs

Dikdukian: Dikdukei Va'eira by Eliyahu Levin

Dikdukian: Leshon Yachid veRabbim by Eliayhu Levin

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Shemos

2026-01-09T16:36:00.000-05:00

Long before the invention of computers, there was a different kind of "artificial intelligence" that certain sectors of the public relied on – astrology. It is clear that there was some validity to the art. But just like modern artificial intelligence, there were some obvious flaws.

At the beginning of this week's parsha, Paroah decrees (1:22) the entire nation to throw their newborn boys in the Nile. Rashi, elaborating on the gemara (Sotah 12a), explains the Egyptian astrologers became aware that the eventual saviour of the Hebrews was born on that day but they were unclear as to whether he was from the Egyptians or the Israelites. The (unsuccessful) decree was meant to cover all the bases. So, what went wrong with the stars?

Kli Yekar exposes the flaw that left the Egyptians astrologers befuddled. Moshe was indeed born from a Jewish mother. However, he was adopted by Bisyah, Paroah's daughter, to the extent that the pasuk recounts (2:10) "and he was a son for her." The gemara (Megillah 13a) teaches from here (with an accompanying pasuk in Divrei Hayamim 4:18) that one who raises an orphan in their own home is considered as if they had given birth to him. This is not an empty platitude. Even the Divine forces that govern the signs that are delivered by the stars consider this as fact. This is why the Egyptians could not be sure.

This idea helped me decipher an issue I had a couple of weeks back. The midrash (couldn't track it down at this time) explains that Potifar's wife chose to pursue Yoseif because she saw through astrology that they would share a common progeny. Her mistake was that this was to come about through Yoseif's marriage to Osnas, her daughter. But we are also taught that Osnas was actually adopted by Potifar and his wife but in truth, she was the daughter of Dinah. So how did Potifar's wife see in the stars that she would share offspring with Yoseif? But now we may understand that the signs provided by the stars were not based solely on absolute biological parenthood. Adopting Osnas made her truly part of the family, as far as astrology was concerned.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
Dikdukian: Nothing to See but Fear Itself

Dikduian: Bas Paroah
Dikduian: From the Children of the Hebrews
Dikduian: The Strange Thing about Straw
Dikduian: Affliction
Dikduian: Raamseis

Dikduian: Dikduk Observations on Shemos by Eliyahu Levin

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Vaychi

2026-01-02T16:11:00.001-05:00

Yesterday, 12 Teves, was the 18^th yahrtzeit of Rabbi Joseph Schechter of Ner Yisroel. This week's shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmaso, Yoseif ben Eliezer Z'ev.

Before Yaakov blesses all his children together, Yoseif brings his sons to Yaakov to be blessed. "And he blessed them on that day saying, by you Israel shall bless saying, may HaShem make you like Efrayim and Menasheh." Rashi validates Yaakov's prophecy by explaining that the blessing was that for generations to come Jews would bless their children to be like Efrayim and Menasheh. Indeed, it is the practice of most Jews to bestow this blessing upon their sons every Shabbos night. Yaakov was blessing his grandchildren that they should merit to be the paradigmatic children like whom all parents hope and pray their children will become.

Although the pasuk begins vayevarecheim, and he blessed them, the actual blessing itself begins becha, by you, in the singular. The word bachem would have been expected in that situation.

When we bless our children to be like Efrayim and Menasheh, it is certainly a tribute to them and their righteousness, having been brought up in a foreign land, surrounded by negative influences and nevertheless emerging as the great men they were. However, the word becha would seem to be referring to Yoseif. It is a tribute to Yoseif and the diligence and dedication with which he brought up his precious children in the most loathsome of societies that we pray that our sons be like his. Therefore, this blessing of Yaakov was very much directed to Yoseif as well.

Chazak, chazak, venischazeik!

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
Dikdukian: You Make the Call: Aveil Mitzrayim

Dikdukian: Efrasah, What is your Real Name

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Vayigash

2025-12-26T07:00:00.001-05:00

Yesterday, 5 Teves, was the 48^th yahrtzeit of my wife's grandfather, Rabbi Dr. Israel Frankel, a"h. This week's shtikle is dedicated le'iluy nishmaso, Yisroel Aryeh ben Asher Yeshayahu.

As the showdown between Yoseif and Yehudah escalates at the beginning of the parsha, Yoseif finally realizes that he could no longer go on deceiving his brothers and hiding his identity. He reveals to them that he is in fact Yoseif. However, he is able to keep up this chicanery for quite some time despite numerous hints. Rashi (42:8) writes that it was Yoseif's newly grown beard that prevented his brothers from discerning that it was him.

However, David Farkas, author of Ha-Doresh Vi-Hamivakesh, suggests another approach. Indeed, one looks different with a beard than without. But after all of the dealings the brothers had with him, could not one of them figure out that this Egyptian viceroy looks an awful lot like their brother? Rather, the Egyptian Pharaohs were known to have worn masks. While Yoseif was only the Prime Minister to the monarch, it is possible that he wore a mask as well. In such a case, only his voice would serve as any hint to his identity. It is thus much easier to understand that the brothers were unable identify him. [Note that the pasuk recounts Yoseif's recognition of his brothers immediately upon their arrival. However, we are not told that they didn't recognize him until after he speaks. This seems to suggest that until Yoseif spoke, the brothers had nothing with which they could possibly have identified him.]

While this suggestion might seem slightly outlandish at first, it seems Ramban in this week's parsha concurs. He writes (46:29) that Yaakov did not recognize Yoseif right away because his face was covered with some sort of head covering as per the custom of Egyptian royalty. And so too, Ramban adds, his brothers did not recognize him. Ramban clearly asserts that it was more than just a beard that concealed Yoseif's identity.

As mentioned above, Yoseif did drop numerous hints to his brothers and while they were baffled on occasion, they failed to come to the realization that it was Yoseif. If Yoseif was trying to conceal his identity, why did he in fact drop all those hints? And why did the brothers not pick up on them?

I heard the following approach in the name of R' Nosson Meir Wachtfogel, zt"l, mashgiach of Lakewood Yeshivah. He explains that when the brothers first encountered Yoseif in Egypt, the pasuk recounts (42:9) that Yoseif remembered his dreams and proceeded to charge his brothers with espionage. It's not that Yoseif necessarily used his dreams as a rationale for badgering his brothers. Rather, Yoseif developed a scheme by which he would allow his brothers to come to their own realization that he was the viceroy of Egypt. If they could discover this by themselves, it would be an acceptance of the integrity of Yoseif's dreams. An outsider might have easily identified Yoseif. The brothers, however, had an inner struggle to contend with. Yoseif kept on hinting to them. The facts were there in front of them. But inside, they could not bring themselves to accept it. Finally, it reached a point where Yoseif could no longer play his game. He tried to no avail. He had to spell it out for his brothers on his own.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Al Pi Cheshbon / Dikdukian: Can you count to 70?

Dikdukian: Pain in the Neck

Dikdukian: Just Do It!

Dikdukian: Shepherd(s)

Dikdukian: Ram'seis

Dikdukian: Dikdukei Vayigash by R' Eliyahu Levin

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Mikeitz

2025-12-19T16:02:00.000-05:00

For the most part, the stories in the Torah follow a linear timeline. That is, one story follows another and another, etc. Even when we invoke the maxim of ein mukdam um'uchar baTorah, that it is possible for anecdotes to be temporally out of place, that is only to say that the entire story belongs in a different spot. But if we step back to last week's parsha, we observe something somewhat unique. After the sale of Yoseif, we learn the full story of Yehudah and his sons and his subsequent encounter with Tamar, resulting in the birth of twin boys. The Torah then resumes with Yoseif's storyline as it continues into this week's parsha. But Yehudah's story arc certainly took some time to develop. His own trials and tribulations were developing at the same time as Yoseif's.

Understandably, it would have been impractical for the Torah to follow the events in a strictly chronological order so we are told of the complete story of Yehudah and Tamar first. The exact time the whole story to transpire is not laid out in the pesukim. According to some assessments, it actually took exactly 22 years – the same duration of time as Yoseif's story until Yaakov finally comes down to Mitzrayim in next week's parsha. This may seem like nothing more than a trivial – although interesting – fact. However, it might help us understand an issue that we have dealt with previously. Why did Yaakov reject Reuvain's offer to be responsible for Binyamin while Yehudah's pledge was accepted? Perhaps we can now understand that Yaakov was aware of the challenges Yehudah had just recently faced and perhaps was still embroiled with. He knew that Yehudah understood the loss of a child as he had lost two of his own. Yehudah's offer therefore appeared much more altruistic and Yaakov chose to put his trust in him.

Have a Chaunkah Samei'ach, a good Shabbos and chodesh tov!

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:
Dikdukian: Clear the Halls (Chanukah)

Dikdukian: Na'asah Nes

Dikdukian: Who's agitating my dots?

Dikdukian: Be Strong

Dikdukian: Just Do It!

Dikdukian: You Make the Call: Ukra'ahu

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Vayeishev

2025-12-12T16:02:00.000-05:00

There is much intrigue surrounding the story of the brothers' treatment of Yoseif and the crime that was ultimately perpetrated. Even establishing the exact facts of the incident can be challenging, let alone understanding the motives and thought processes behind each character's actions. The first step of the sale of Yoseif is his sale to the Yishmaelim. Yehudah suggests (37:27) "let us sell him to the Yishmaelim… for he is our brother, our flesh." A thought occurred to me – is it possible that Yehudah could have been referring not to Yoseif but to Yishmael?

Sure enough, Kli Yekar, makes that very suggestion. He goes to great lengths to explain the brothers' plans and change of plans and posits that they specifically sold him to the Yishmaelim with the expectation that as "cousins," they would show mercy towards Yoseif and not mistreat him.

Have a good Shabbos and Chanukah Samei'ach!

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Clear the Halls (Chanukah)

Dikdukian: Naaseh Neis (Chanukah)

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Vayishlach

2025-12-05T16:07:00.000-05:00

When Yaakov learns that Eisav is coming to meet him with 400 men, he expresses great fear as stated (32:8) "vayira Yaakov me'od vayeitzer lo." There are various suggestions given as to the exact definition of the word vayeitzer. The predominant interpretation seems to be that it is from the same root as tzar, implying that Yaakov was stressed.

I suggest that perhaps this word is from the root of the word yeitzer which comes from the same root as tzurah, a form. While the body is the physical form of the human being, the yeitzer - both the yeitzer tov and the yeitzer hara - comprises spiritual form of the human being. Yaakov's yeitzer, his spiritual form, was one that directly opposed murder and violence, unlike his brother Eisav. Rashi writes that while vayira was indicative a fear that he himself may be killed, the connotation of vayeizter is that Yaakov was worried that he might be put in a position where he would have to kill others. In other words, Yaakov was troubled that he would be forced to act in a way that is antithetical to his yeitzer. Thus, vayeitzer can be interpreted to mean that his yeitzer was being bothered.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: The Great Dishon Confusion

Dikdukian: Appearances

Dikdukian: Efrasah, What is your Real Name?

Al Pi Cheshbon: Goats and Amicable Numbers by Dr. Ari Brodsky

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.

The Weekly Shtikle - Vayeitzei

2025-11-28T15:50:00.000-05:00

A number of years ago, an interesting story surfaced in one of the Jewish news outlets. A gas attendant at a station on the Palisades Parkway came up with a clever scam. When filling up for an Orthodox Jew, he would mention that on Passover, "one of your guys" filled up on gas but forgot his wallet and he paid for it instead. Many individuals ended up giving this man money in order to make a kiddush Hashem. But this is the 21^st century and thanks to social media, these stories began to spread and the attendant was exposed as a con artist. He targeted Orthodox Jews, however, because he knew he could rely on their honesty and integrity and feeling of responsibility.

To some degree, it is a similar tactic employed by our enemies around and within Israel who seem to constantly seek the signing of treaties and accords with Israel. The value of these deals, of course, is that the Jews can always be relied on to naïvely keep their word while their supposed counterparts in peace barely heed their side of the bargain. (This shtikle was originally published well before the groundbreaking Abraham Accords. We can only hope and pray that those treaties do not follow a similar pattern.)

This is by no means an original ruse. In fact, the last couple of parshiyos expose this as one the oldest tricks in The Book, literally. First, Avraham is approached by Avimelech (21:22). It appears Avraham's success has led Avimelech to the realization that this is someone he better make sure to keep on his side. So, he engages him in a pact not just for the present but for generations to come. Then, as Yitzchak grows ever powerful, Avimelech approaches him as well (26:26) to secure a mutual deal. History would go on to show that while the progeny of Avraham and Yitzchak carefully kept their side of the deal to the best of their abilities, the Philistine descendants of Avimelech most certainly did not.

Finally, in the end of our parsha we find Lavan pulling a very similar stunt. After realizing he could never overcome Yaakov as a foe, Lavan demands a covenant with Yaakov, ensuring that Yaakov would not act against him. But many generations later, Bil'am had no qualms about dishonoring this agreement in attempting to destroy Yaakov's offspring. (See commentaries to Bemidbar 22:25 who note that the donkey was running Bil'am into the very monument that is mentioned in our parsha in order to remind him of this covenant.)

And so it has been and so it will likely always be. But I am not at all suggesting that this is something that should change. In fact, in a Rosh HaShanah shtikle, I suggest that it is in the merit of our steadfast trustworthiness in honouring our agreements with others – whether they keep their side or not – that HaShem honours the covenant made with our forefathers, even if we are guilty of violating our pledge to keep the Torah in its entirety. It is simply a virtue that makes up the fabric of our nation.

Have a good Shabbos.

Eliezer Bulka
WeeklyShtikle@weeklyshtikle.com

Shtikle Blog Weekly Roundup:

Dikdukian: Wordsthatsticktogether

Dikdukian: From his Sleep

Dikdukian: Complete it

Dikdukian: Qualification of the AHOY rule

Dikdukian: Different Types of Kissing

Dikdukian: Come on, People - Part II

AstroTorah: Did Yaakov Leave the Solar System by R' Ari Storch

AstroTorah: Yaakov's Lesson on Zemanei HaYom by R' Ari Storch

Please visit the new portal for all Shtikle-related sites, www.weeklyshtikle.com

The Weekly Shtikle and related content are now featured on BaltimoreJewishLife.com

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to shtiklelist+unsubscribe@weeklyshtikle.com.