What Went Wrong - Shelach 5771

Parshas Shelach is primarily about the Maiseh Hamiraglim which caused Klal Yisrael to remain in the Midbar for 40 years. One of the most difficult questions is how 10 people who were Anashim Roshei Yisrael could suddenly become such Reshaim.

I would like to share with you a Ramban followed by a Steipler which when taken together gives us a fantastic insight into what has taken place.

The Ramban says that the Yesod of the Cheit of the Meraglim was the following. They were sent into Eretz Yisrael to spy enough to see how Klal Yisrael should conquer Eretz Yisrael. How they should do it B’derech Hateva. Since the battle for the most part for the conquest of Eretz Yisrael would be B’derech Hateva (in a natural way) therefore it would be normal for Meraglim to go in and see how it should be done.

So their job was a question of how. So the Ramban says instead of trying to answer how, they went and answered if they should go in. They switched from an understanding of the question being how they should go in to a question of if they should go in. That Shinui from how to if was the root of their problem. So even though they were good people, when they understood the job that it was a question of if they should go in that was the first step that led them to a disaster of the Cheit Hamiraglim.

The Steipler in Birchas Peretz alludes to this Pshat, however, he doesn’t quote the Ramban. He adds a Nikuda. He points out that it seems to be a Stira in Rashi. Rashi 13:3 first says (כלם אנשים: כל אנשים שבמקרא לשון חשיבות, ואותה שעה כשרים היו) Kulam Anashim, B’ose Sha’a Kishairim Hayu. Rashi says that when they left they were Kishairim, they were good people.

On the other hand Rashi 13:26 also says (וילכו ויבואו: מהו וילכו, להקיש הליכתן לביאתן, מה ביאתן בעצה רעה, אף הליכתן בעצה רעה) Ma Biasan B’eitza Ra, Af Halichasan B’eitza Ra. Rashi says they went out with a bad plan. As if to say that they were Reshaim when they left and that is a contradiction between these two Rashi’s. (א"ה פנ"י קידושין סא: סובר שי"ל מדרשים חלוקים על שני דברי רש"י)

The Steipler explains beautifully. The Yesod is what are you going to investigate. Are you going to see how to enter Eretz Yisrael or are you going to see if to enter Eretz Yisrael. B’ose Sha’a Kishairim Hayu, before they were appointed they were Kishairim. The moment they were appointed, a certain Gaiva came upon them. A Gasas Haruach, a haughtiness. That haughtiness caused them to decide that they were the experts, they were going to be the generals so to speak who were going to decide if this conquest was feasible. That change from trying to investigate how to enter Eretz Yisrael which is the job of Kishairim, of good people to the decision to decide if to enter Eretz Yisrael, that change made them Yitziasan B’eitza Ra. They went out with a bad Eitza. It doesn’t mean that at that moment they were ready to destroy Klal Yisrael with their bad plans. But it means that the root of the problem, their view of themselves as the experts of Klal Yisrael, that image was a bad Eitza.

We can all understand that Shinui that change taking place rather quickly. The change from how should we enter Eretz Yisrael to if we should enter Eretz Yisrael. That change of jobs L’gamri, totally, and therefore it ended up causing something terrible to happen. 

In Sefer Yehoshua in Perek 2 we will see that Yehoshua also sends Meraglim and everyone wonders how after the debacle that takes place in Parshas Shelach, how does Yehoshua make the same mistake and send Meraglim.

The Chasam Sofer at the beginning of the Parsha explains that the idea of sending Meraglim was not a bad idea if they are going to see how to conquer. It was a bad idea because they went to see if they should conquer. Yehoshua made the point that Moshe Rabbeinu’s idea is not a bad idea and it was the people who by changing it from the how decision to an if decision that was caused a problem. 

I think it is fair to say that in life in general it is this way. Hakadosh Baruch Hu puts many challenges in front of us and our question is how to navigate the Matziv, the situation into which Hakadosh Baruch Hu places us. Very often our mentality is an if mentality. Not an if decision to choose which Nisyanos will come before us, however, an if only idea. A mentality that this shouldn’t be happening when something difficult happens. That mentality pushes people down. The idea that Hakadosh Baruch Hu is Hameichin Mitzadei Gover sets a person’s footsteps. Whatever challenge comes before you in your life as unpleasant as it may seem, is something that is put in front of you by the big Meichin Mitzadei Gover, by Hakadosh Baruch Hu and the question is only how to navigate and deal with the situation. When a person focuses on how, he can deal with situations well. This is a lesson from the Parshas Hamiraglim.

How Much Challah? - Shelach 5770

The Posuk says 15:20 כ  רֵאשִׁית, עֲרִסֹתֵכֶם--חַלָּה, תָּרִימוּ תְרוּמָה:  כִּתְרוּמַת גֹּרֶן, כֵּן תָּרִימוּ אֹתָהּ  Rashi explain כתרומת גורן: שלא נאמר בה שיעור ולא כתרומת מעשר שנאמר בה שיעור, אבל חכמים נתנו שיעור, לבעל הבית אחד מעשרים וארבעה, ולנחתום אחד מארבעים ושמונה  Rashi is saying that there is no Shiur for Challah. The very next Posuk 15:21 says כא  מֵרֵאשִׁית, עֲרִסֹתֵיכֶם, תִּתְּנוּ לַירוָר, תְּרוּמָה--לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם  Rashi says תתנו לה' תרומה: לפי שלא שמענו שיעור לחלה, נאמר תתנו, שיהא בה כדי נתינה  Rashi here says that it is not like Teruma in that you can give just a Mashahu and that you must give a K’dei Nesina. So there seems to be something of an inconsistency between the two Rashis. There is a Teshuvas Noda B’Yehuda that discusses it, however, maybe you can find a Teretz in the Meforshei HaChumash.

Rav Pam's Matza Challah - Shelach 5770

Rav Pam was Noheg a Chumra for himself that when he opened a box of Matzos or if he went someplace to eat even though that place had a Hechsher, he would break of a small piece and say Zu Chalah and throw it out. It is really not possible to give a proper Hechsher on properly separating Challah. A Hechsher is based on coming into a store and catching someone using a Treif ingredient. This is Yotzi V’nichnas. By Challah it is difficult because you can’t catch someone in the act of not taking Challah. So as a personal Chumra or Hiddur, Rav Pam would break off a piece of Matza and put it aside. He was not Machmir to burn it in such a case. In that way he was Zahir in this particular Mitzvah. In Chutz L’aretz it helps that once you separate Challah even in your own home you can say this is Challah for all of the dough that was made together with this and in that way in case there was some error and Challah wasn’t taken, he would be Mesakein for others as well.

The Eyes Have It 2 - Shelach 5770

13:22  כב  וַיַּעֲלוּ בַנֶּגֶב, וַיָּבֹא עַד-חֶבְרוֹן, וְשָׁם אֲחִימַן שֵׁשַׁי וְתַלְמַי, יְלִידֵי הָעֲנָק; וְחֶבְרוֹן, שֶׁבַע שָׁנִים נִבְנְתָה, לִפְנֵי, צֹעַן מִצְרָיִם There is a Drasha from Chazal from Maseches Sotah 34b (20 lines from the top), ויעלו בנגב ויבא עד חברון ויבאו מבעי ליה אמר רבא מלמד שפירש כלב מעצת מרגלים והלך ונשתטח על קברי אבות אמר להן אבותי בקשו עלי רחמים שאנצל מעצת מרגלים. This is when Calev went to Daven at the Meoras Hamachpeila. From here we learn that there is a benefit in gong to Daven at the Kever of a Tzaddik and this is the only Mekor in Tanach for such an idea.

The question of course is how does it work and why is it better to Daven at the Kever of a Tzaddik as opposed to when one Davens wherever he is, in the Zechus of a Tzaddik or even asking that the Avos should be Mailitz Yosher?

Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz in his Sichos Mussar explains, (this is the Sichos Mussar that was printed in Taf Shin Samach Bais that has added the Shmuzzin that were delivered during the 6 day war.) There he discusses how a person gets inspired by that which he sees and he says an incredible thing. We find in Parshas Vayechi in 48:7 ז  וַאֲנִי בְּבֹאִי מִפַּדָּן, מֵתָה עָלַי רָחֵל בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן בַּדֶּרֶךְ, בְּעוֹד כִּבְרַת-אֶרֶץ, לָבֹא אֶפְרָתָה; וָאֶקְבְּרֶהָ שָּׁם בְּדֶרֶךְ אֶפְרָת, הִוא בֵּית לָחֶם This is when Yaakov Avinu excuses himself to Yosef for burying Rachel at the side of the road. The reason he did so is two parts. One is that the Yidden leaving to Galus would have a place to Daven and secondly and more primary that Rachel would cry for Klal Yisrael as is found in Yirmiyahu 31:14 - 15 יד  כֹּה אָמַר יְרוָר, קוֹל בְּרָמָה נִשְׁמָע נְהִי בְּכִי תַמְרוּרִים--רָחֵל, מְבַכָּה עַל-בָּנֶיהָ; מֵאֲנָה לְהִנָּחֵם עַל-בָּנֶיהָ, כִּי אֵינֶנּוּ As we know, Hashem responds in the next Posuk, טו  כֹּה אָמַר יְרוָר, מִנְעִי קוֹלֵךְ מִבֶּכִי, וְעֵינַיִךְ, מִדִּמְעָה:  כִּי יֵשׁ שָׂכָר לִפְעֻלָּתֵךְ נְאֻם-יְרור, וְשָׁבוּ מֵאֶרֶץ אוֹיֵב  So Rav Chaim says, a Neshamah is also more inspired to Daven better if it is in the place of the Tzar and sees the Tzar. The Koach Hari’iyah (seeing) inspires. Therefore, it wouldn’t be the same if Rochel was buried in Chevron which is not so far away as it is when Rochel is buried there and the Yidden gong to Galus were passing by. The Koach of Ri’iyah (seeing) is such that even after Petira the Neshamas Haguf is inspired when those in Tzar are standing right there. Of course this explains why standing at the Kever Hatzaddik is greater than Davening somewhere else and being Mispallel exactly the same way. This concept of the Koach Hari’iya Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz explains, certainly applies to people who are alive.

We find by Moshe Rabbeinu in Shemos 2:11 יא  וַיְהִי בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם, וַיִּגְדַּל מֹשֶׁה וַיֵּצֵא אֶל-אֶחָיו, וַיַּרְא, בְּסִבְלֹתָם; וַיַּרְא אִישׁ מִצְרִי, מַכֶּה אִישׁ-עִבְרִי מֵאֶחָיו  Moshe went out and saw the pain of Klal Yisrael. Rashi says וירא בסבלתם: נתן עיניו ולבו להיות מיצר עליהם Moshe put his eyes and his heart on the difficulties of his brothers.

This idea is explained by Rav Tzaddok in Tzidkos Hatzadik Os 205 where he says when someone gets information through his ears it affects primarily his mind. When one gets information with his eyes it is more than information, it inspires the persons imagination and Leiv and therefore has a greater Hashpa’a.

That is this idea. When one sees even if it only through the Neshamah it has a bigger Hashpa’a than it would otherwise have.

With this we can understand a Maharsha that we once discussed on Parshas Ki Sisa. The Maharsha asks why Moshe Rabbeinu broke the Luchos only after he came down if the Ribbono Shel Olam already had told him what had taken place. Moshe Rabbeinu undoubtedly believed the Ribbono Shel Olam. So if he felt that it was proper to break the Luchos he should have broke them right away, why did he wait until he came down?

The Maharsha answers that when he saw with his own eyes what was happening it inspired him even more and he broke the Luchos, as it says in Shemos 32:19 יט  וַיְהִי, כַּאֲשֶׁר קָרַב אֶל-הַמַּחֲנֶה, וַיַּרְא אֶת-הָעֵגֶל, וּמְחֹלֹת; וַיִּחַר-אַף מֹשֶׁה, וַיַּשְׁלֵךְ מִיָּדָו אֶת-הַלֻּחֹת, וַיְשַׁבֵּר אֹתָם, תַּחַת הָהָר 

Rav Moshe in a Teshuva in Orach Chaim Cheilek Gimmel Teshuva Nun wonders if it could be that Moshe Rabbeinu was more inspired from seeing than from hearing the same thing from the Ribbono Shel Olam himself.

Rav Tzaddok’s Yesod is yes, when someone sees something with his eyes, he is more inspired to move and to Daven and do things based on what he saw.

The Pirush HaGRA on Megillas Esther Perek 5footnote 18 says this idea that emotions are mostly influenced by the eye. He actually brings that that is why Moshe Rabbeinu broke the Luchos there. This idea that the eye has a separate ability to be Mashpia, Rav Chaim Shmuelevitz writes it regarding the Koach Hatefilla, that if you see a need and see a Tzorech you will daven better for it and that concept is probably the reason a miracle took place at Har Sinai as it says in Shemos 20:14 יד  וְכָל-הָעָם רֹאִים אֶת-הַקּוֹלֹת וְאֶת-הַלַּפִּידִם, וְאֵת קוֹל הַשֹּׁפָר, וְאֶת-הָהָר, עָשֵׁן; וַיַּרְא הָעָם וַיָּנֻעוּ, וַיַּעַמְדוּ מֵרָחֹק Why did Klal Yisrael have to see the voces and the sound? The idea is that when a person sees it has a special effect on a person. We see it is even so regarding a Neshamah L’Acher Petira as well.

A second thought regarding the Koach Hari’iya is brought in Rav Schwab’s Sefer Maayan Beis Hashoeiva on Parshas Shelach (pg # 324 on Perek 14:1) it refers to the Gemara in Maseches Sanhedrin 104b (12 lines from the bottom) (פצו עליך פיהם אמר רבא אמר רבי יוחנן בשביל מה הקדים פ"א לעי"ן בשביל מרגלים שאמרו בפיהם מה שלא ראו בעיניהם) that asks why in Megillas Eicha where the Pesukim are written in the order of the Aleph Bais does it have two letters out of order, the Pei and the Ayin. In the first Perek the Ayin is first and the Pei is second. In the subsequent Perakim the Pei is first and the Ayin is second. Why? The Gemara explains that Eicha happened because of the Meraglim’s sin that they said with their mouth things that they did not see with their eyes.

Rav Schwab asks that this is not so, we don’t see in the Pesukim that they said any lies. You can see the exchange that takes place at the end of Perek 13. They reported that there are giants there and powerful people there which were true. The Aveira was that the Meraglim lacked Bitachon that Hashem couldn’t conquer the land.

Rav Schwab answers that it all has to do with sight. A person can look at something with physical eyes or with a view that is spiritually inspired. When Avraham Avinu came with Yitzchok, Yishmael, and Eliezer to perform the Akeida, in Beraishis 22:4 when he saw the mountain from the distance ד  בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי, וַיִּשָּׂא אַבְרָהָם אֶת-עֵינָיו וַיַּרְא אֶת-הַמָּקוֹם--מֵרָחֹק  Rav Schwab brings that Avraham saw that this mountain has the Shechina. He asked Yitzchok what do you see? He answered I see it has the Shechina. Then Avraham asked Yishmael and Eliezer what do you see? They answered that they see stones, trees, and perhaps buildings on the mountain. Two people can look at the same thing and see totally different things. It depends how one looks at it.

 It is the same thing with the Meraglim. The Meraglim came to Eretz Yisrael and saw with Gashmiyusdika eyes and everything they reported was true. However, what they said with their mouth is not what saw with their eyes. They said what they failed to see which was that they failed to see the great Ruchniyos of Eretz Yisrael. This is another lesson about what one sees. The Cheit Hamiraglim is very much alive today. People who visit Eretz Yisrael today can see very different things. Some people see the shops, the tours, and the fun while others see only the Kedusha. This is another tremendous insight into the Koach Hari’iya.

A third insight into the Koach Hari’iya. 15:39 לט  וְהָיָה לָכֶם, לְצִיצִת, וּרְאִיתֶם אֹתוֹ וּזְכַרְתֶּם אֶת-כָּל-מִצְו‍ֹת יְרוָר, וַעֲשִׂיתֶם אֹתָם; וְלֹא-תָתוּרוּ אַחֲרֵי לְבַבְכֶם, וְאַחֲרֵי עֵינֵיכֶם, אֲשֶׁר-אַתֶּם זֹנִים, אַחֲרֵיהֶם The next Dvar Torah is said over from Rav Mordechai Druk the late Maggid of Yerushalayim in his Sefer Darash Mordechai (pg # 136). Rashi explains the Posuk by saying העין רואה והלב חומד והגוף עושה את העבירות The eyes sees and the heart desires based on what the eyes sees. The problem is shouldn’t the Posuk be in the reverse order that Lo Sasuru Acharei Eineichem V’acharei L’vavchem? The order of the Posuk does not seem to be consistent with the Drasha that Rashi is bringing?

Rav Druk explained that two people can be walking down the street at the same time and one sees something improper and notices it while another person doesn’t notice it. It is true that when you see something with your eyes as a result the heart desires. But what a person chooses to see and notice is based on his Hakdama of preparing his Leiv to be a Leiv Chomeid. It is a cycle the eyes see and the heart desires and then the eyes see and notices again. A person who prepares his heart properly has a Siyata Dishmaya not to see things that he should not be seeing.

Eisav goes out to fight and the Posuk says in 33:5 ה  וַיִּשָּׂא אֶת-עֵינָיו, וַיַּרְא אֶת-הַנָּשִׁים  Eisav noticed the women. When Yitzchak went out to Daven Mincha and Rivka was coming back with Eliezer the Posuk says 24:63 סג  וַיֵּצֵא יִצְחָק לָשׂוּחַ בַּשָּׂדֶה, לִפְנוֹת עָרֶב; וַיִּשָּׂא עֵינָיו וַיַּרְא, וְהִנֵּה גְמַלִּים בָּאִים  Yitzchak didn’t even notice that Rivka was there. He didn’t see anything he should not have seen. Depending on where a person is that affects what a person sees.

Rav Druk said over that the Nesivos when he would walk into the Bais Medrash would do Teshuva on what he had seen before he started to learn so that what he saw on the streets wouldn’t affect his learning. We who walk through streets that are far less pure than what the Nesivos saw just sit down and start to learn right away. It has to do with where a person is coming from and the orientation of a person. We see all the time that two people can go through the same experience and can see, observe, feel, or even Daven for very different things.

Why is the Parsha of Tzitzis together with the Parsha of the Meraglim? The idea of Tzitzis is Uri’isem Oso to see the Tzitzis. Two people can look at Tzitzis and see different things. One person can see just strings and someone else sees the Taryag Mitzvos, the Mitzvos of Hashem in the Tzitzis.

 Rebbi mentioned how he used to see Rav Moshe say Uri’isem Oso and lift the Tzitzis before his eyes and look at them. He saw more than just strings in the Tzitzis. People who only see strings stop looking at their Tzitzis by Uri’isem Oso because they don’t even realize that they are saying Uri’isem Oso. You have to train yourself. When the Leiv has the right desire than the Ayin Ro’e, then the eye sees properly.

Overcoming - Shelach 5769

V’avdi Choleiv Eikev Hoןsa Ruach Acheres Imo, that Calev because he possessed in him a different spirit and followed Hashem fully, will be brought into Eretz Yisrael. The obvious question is, Yehoshua is missing. The Aruch Chaim Hakadosh has a wonderful Vort. Moshe was Mispallel for Yehoshua, and therefore the Ruach Shtus that came into all of these Meraglim didn’t affect Yehoshua because he had the protection of Moshe Rabbeinu. Calev on the other hand, did have this Ruach Shtus or Yeitzer Hora to rebel against the Ribbono Shel Olam, and that is why Calev went to Chevron to Daven. Yehoshua didn’t go to Daven. So Calev is an Odom Gadol. Yehoshua, ok, he deserves to live, he didn’t do a Cheit, but his Gadlus is not recognized. The Gadlus is when someone has within him a Ruach Shtus a Yeitzer Hora and he overcomes it. That is the Teitch of Eikev Hoisa Ruach Acheres Imo, typically you would Teitch it, that is was a Ruach of Good. The Aruch Chaim Hakadosh says no, it means he had a Ruach from the Sitra Achara, a Ruach to do Aveiros. He overcame it. So he Davka will have the extra level of Schar. Takeh, the Bnei Calev got an extra Cheilek in Eretz Yisrael which was Chevron. Yehoshua did not receive an extra Cheilek. The lesson from this is, the Gadlus of a person is not one who does not have a Yeitzer Hora. A person for whom it is hard for him to battle his Yeitzer Hora and he overcomes, that is the Choleiv Eikev Hoןsa Ruach Acheres Imo.

40/40 - Shelach 5769

1) Regarding the Meraglim, Moshe davens to Hashem in Perek Yud Daled Posuk Yud Cheis, Hashem Erech Apaiyim  V’rav Chesed Nosai Avon Vofosha V’nakei Lo Yinakei Poked Avon Avos Al Bonim Al Shilashim V’al Ribai’im. It is quite similar to the Yud Gimmel Middos, however, it is not exactly the same. Isn’t it strange that we say Hashem Hashem Keil Rachum V’chanun Erech Apaiyim and Moshe just said Hashem Erech Apaiyim. We know that the Yud Gimmel Middos are the Middah by which we daven. Moshe skipped Hashem Keil Rachum V’chanun and goes straight to Erech Apaiyim V’rav Chesed. Why didn’t he use all the Yud Gimmel Middos?

2) After the Tefillah by Moshe regarding the Meraglim, we find in Posuk Chaf that Hashem says Solachti Kid’varecha. What happens after the Ribbono Shel Olam forgives? Hakadosh Boruch Hu says he will punish them. Ai, I thought Hashem was gong to forgive? Posuk Chaf Beis says Vayinasu Osi Zeh Eser P’amim that they have tested Hashem these ten times. Posuk Chaf Gimmel says V’chal M’na’atzai Lo Yir’uha that all those who have angered Hashem will not be Zoche to see Eretz Yisrael. Ai, I thought Hashem had said Solachti Kid’varecha? Posuk Chaf Tes says Bamidbar Hazeh Yiplu Figraichem V’chal P’kudaichem, that in the desert your corpses shall fall, all of you who were counted according to your numbers from 20 and above. Ai, I thought Hashem said Solachti Kid’varecha? It is a Pele.

3) Hashem says in Posuk Lamed Daled that the punishment will be B’mispar Hayomim Asher Tar’tem Es Ha’aretz Arbaim Yom, Yom Lashono, Yom Lashono Tisu Es Avonosaichem Arbaim Shanah, that According to the number of days which you scouted the land, forty days, a day for a year, a day for a year you will bear the burden of your iniquity forty years. So the punishment is for 40 years because one year for every day. Is that the Middah? One year for every day? This expression seems unfair? 

To answer all 3 of these difficulties, we will start with a Ramban. The Ramban says on Hashem Erech Apaiyim, which was our first Kasha, the reason Moshe didn’t use the Yud Gimmel Middos, is because Moshe understood that at this point Klal Yisroel would not escape without an Onesh. Therefore, he didn’t daven that there shouldn’t be an Onesh at all.

So what did he ask for? The Klei Yakar is Masbir, Moshe asked that instead of the punishment coming all at once, it should be spread over a period of time. Therefore, Hashem said Solachti Kid’varecha. Hashem forgave the way Moshe had asked, meaning the punishment should be spread over a period of time. The third question that was asked that it is not fair to have Yom Lashono, Yom Lashono, it was not a years punishment for each day. Chas V’shalom. Yom Lashono, it will be 40 days of punishment for 40 days of Cheit. However, the Erech Apaiyim is that it will be spread out over 40 years. It is a very Geshmake P’shat in what took place here with Moshe Rabbeinu’s Bakashos.

J020 -The Hei Hayediyah

שאו את ארון הברית

הארון נגנז בזמן בית ראשון ובבית שני לא היה ארון.

הגר"י קמנצקי הקשה שהרי יש מצוה לעשות כלי המקדש, ומצוה זו קיימת ועומדת שאם יאבד א' מן הכלים יעשו אחרת. א"כ בבית שני שעשו מחדש כל הכלים שלקחו האויב, למה לא עשו ארון חדש?

ותי', שמטרת הארון היתה להחזיק את הלוחות ולכן נקראת "ארון הברית" דוקא  ולכן כיון שנגנז הארון הראשון עם הלוחות לא היה ענין לעשות ארון חדש.

(אגב בכלי חמדה פרשת פקודי תי' ע"ז שהרי הארון בנס לא החזיק מקום,ולכן לא היה לו מקום מסויים רק שהיתה במקדש, והרי נגנזה הראשון במקדש, ועדיין היה שם ובזה מתקיים מצותו ולא היה צורך לעשות אחרת, ע"ש.)

כאן כתיב "ארון הברית" עם ה' הידיעה על המילה השניה מהתואר. וכן הוא בדרך כלל כמו "אשת האיש" "גיד הנשה" "בית המקדש". אמנם להלן פסוק יד כתוב "הארון הברית" בשני ה'. הגר"י קמנצקי (אמת ליעקב או"ח סי' תקפ"ב, וברכות יב) יישב ד"ז ע"פ הנ"ל. כיון שהארון היה להחזיק הלוחות, נמצא ששמו "ארון-הברית" הוא שם אחד ארוך ("אינו שם נסמך אלא השם עצמו"), וכשנוסף לו ה' שייך להוסיפו בתחלתו: ה"ארון-הברית."

עפ"ז מיישב גם הלשון "המלך המשפט", אשר לכאו' גם קשה למה לא נאמר רק "מלך המשפט". ותי' כנ"ל שאין הקב"ה מלך של משפט אלא מציאות של "מלך המשפט."

בעיקר היסוד הנ"ל שרק המילה השניה מקבלת "ה" כ"כ ר' צדוק בספר אור זרוע לצדיק.

אבל יש הרבה יוצאים מן הכלל כמו "המאור הגדול" "היד הגדולה" "הלילה הזה". וצריך ליישב מהי הכלל ומהי הימה"כ.

ובאמת בהכתב והקבלה דברים לג חולק וסובר שבעצם צריך להיות שני "ה". וכן כת ר' זלמן האנאו בסידור שערי תפילה שיש לומר "בזמן הזה" בפתח עמו "בהזמן הזה" שכן הכלל להיות בשני "ה" , ור' יעקב עמדין השיג עליו בזה.

בעולם המחשבה משמשת אות "ה" לענין יצירה. מנחות כט: - בראשית ב-ד "בהבראם - ב"ה" בראם", שהעוה"ז נברא מכח ה"ה".

וע' כלי יקר פר' לך לך (בראשית יז טו) שנתוסף "ה" לשרה בעבור שיש ב"ה" כח התולדה וסימנך "הא לכם זרע." ורבינו בחיי כת' ששרה רבקה לאה בלהה וזלפה היה להם "ה" אבל לא רחל וחסר לה כח התולדה. לכן אמרה ליעקב שיש לבלהה שני "ה" ולכן תבנה גם היא ממנה. (א"ה ע"ע רבינו בחיי עה"פ אב המון גוים ופסוק ותקרא שמו ראובן.)

ענין ה"ה" במחשבה קשורה לענין "ה" הידיעה בדקדוק. שכח היצירה והתולדה קשורים להחשק החשיבות וההתענינות ששמים בה. אדם מצליח בדבר כשהוא מחשיבו ומרגיש שההדבר ההוא מיוחד בחשיבותו - "ה" הידיעה.

באור גדליהו פרשת וירא דף לג כת' שה"ה" מורכבת מ"ד" ו"י", ה"ד" הוא העולם הגשמי, ד רוחות העולם, וה"י" הוא נקודת כח החיות. וכנ"ל שה"ה" הוא התולדה והחיות שבעוה"ז.

- דברי חיזוק בענין הנ"ל.

המשנ"ב סי' ח סע' ה הביא מהלבוש ועוד הרבה אחרונים שיש לומר "להתעטף בציצית" בשוא כדעת המחבר וכן מנהג הספרדים. סברת הלבוש שכיון שאין לנו תכלת אי אפשר לומר שאנו מתעטפים ב"ה"ציצית. אבל למעשה לא נהגו כן אלא כר' זלמן האנאו (א"ה וב"ח והרבה אחרונים) שחולק, ואמרים "בציצית" בפתח. אולי י"ל כנ"ל שכל מה שאנו עושים אפילו אינה ממש מושלם, צריך להיות "ה"מצוה.

שבת קנא: "שנים אשר אין בהם חפץ (קהלת יב א) - אלו ימות המשיח שאין בהם לא זכות ולא חובה." ותמוה שאנו מתפללים לביאת המשיח ובגמ' אמרינן שאין בהם חפץ. אומרים בשם החפץ חיים שליחידים אה"נ אינו טוב שיבוא ומ"מ להכלל ולכבוד השכינה טוב. אבל בספר "ובא לציון גואל" הרבה להביא ראיות שיש זכות וחובה בימות המשיח. - רש"י שם כת' שאין זכות שכולם יהיו עשירים ולא חובה לקפוץ יד, משמע שבין אדם לחבירו לא יהי אבל בין אדם למקום יהיה. - הרמב"ם בתשובה ט-ב ומלכים ב-ד כת' שנתאוו החכמים לימות המשיח כדי שיוכלו לעבוד את ה' ויזכו לחיי העוה"ב.

ר' שוואב פרשת חיי שרה הק' סתירה דומה לזה בנוגע למלאכים, אם יש להם שכר ועונש. וכת' ליישב, שאה"נ אין בחירה למלאכים אם לעבוד את ה' אבל יש להם נסיון איך לעבוד את ה'. אם יעשוה עם חיות - "ה" הידיעה - או כלאחר יד. ובזה מבאר מה שהקב"ה נסה את אברהם, 60 שנה אחרי "ומצאת את לבבו נאמן לפניך וכרות עמו הברית." הקב"ה ידע שישמע לו, אבל ניסהו לראות אם ישכם בבקר לחבוש חמורו...

אולי י"ל כן לענין ימות המשיח ג"כ. הזכות וחובה יהיה באופן העבודה.