Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Oy Lanu mi'Yom haDin, Oy Lanu mi'Yom haTochacha

There is a particularly beautiful Beis haLeivi on the final events that culminate in the reunification of Yosef with his brothers.  Yehuda has very poignantly expressed that he cannot possibly go home with out Binyamin; the pain would be too much for his father and would surely die.  Yosef can no longer restrain himself and declares: "I am Yosef.  Is my father still alive?"  (B'reishis 45:3).  The brothers are stunned and shocked; they cannot even answer.

The Beis haLeivi notes at least three difficulties in the pasuk itself.  First, in the very next pasuk, Yosef (seemingly) again declares, "I am your brother, Yosef".  Second, the whole crux of this drama is that Yaakov is alive, after all.  Finally, no answer is given; the question is just forgotten!?  The medrash offers only more confusion by commenting: Oy Lanu mi'Yom haDin, Oy Lanu mi'Yom Tochacha!  Ummm... what?  Besides the fact that this seems to be a totally unrelated thought, why are two days mentioned: Yom haDin, Yom haTochacha.  Isn't that the same thing?

I truly suggest that you learn through this Beis haLeivi yourself, but here's the essence.  Yosef is not revealing his identity.  He is saying to Yehuda, "You are saying that your father could not survive separation from Binyamin and your entire concern is for his welfare.  However, I am Yosef, whom you sold into slavery away from my father for all these years.  Is my father still alive?"  Yehuda and his brothers are stunned into silence, not because of a confrontation with their long, lost brother; that will happen in the next pasuk.  This confrontation is something much, much worse.  Yehuda has made an impassioned plea, poured his soul out.  Yet in an instant, all that pathos, all that sincerity -- gone; they are confronted by their hypocrisy.  Their own actions testify against them.

That's what the medrash means.  Oy Lanu mi'Yom haDin -- when we are brought to judgement and try to defend ourselves; Oy Lanu mi'Yom haTochacha -- our own actions will be brought to testify against us.  We think we will have an answer when confronted with our sins.  Din asks, "Why didn't you daven with more sincerity?  Why didn't you put more effort into learning how to daven?"  We answer, "It's hard.  I don't feel I am getting anything out of it."  Tochacha retorts, "You went to the gym even though it was hard.  You went even when you didn't feel you were getting anything out of it.  You don't seem to mind when it's what you want."  Din asks, "Why didn't you have more emuna?"  We answer, "It's hard to believe in something you can't see.  There is no tangible evidence."  Tochacha retorts, "You believed in atoms. You don't seem need tangible evidence when that belief doesn't stop you from doing what you want."  Din asks, "Why didn't you learn more?"  We answer, "I don't have the head for it."  Tochacha retorts, "You figured out a computer well enough to read emails.  Seems you have the head for things you want to have the head for."

Oy Lanu mi'Yom haDin, Oy Lanu mi'Yom haTochacha.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction.  That is, even th

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Shabbo

Thought for the Day: אוושא מילתא Debases Yours Shabbos

My granddaughter came home with a list the girls and phone numbers in her first grade class.  It was cute because they had made it an arts and crafts project by pasting the list to piece of construction paper cut out to look like an old desk phone and a receiver attached by a pipe cleaner.  I realized, though, that the cuteness was entirely lost on her.  She, of course, has never seen a desk phone with a receiver.  When they pretend to talk on the phone, it is on any relatively flat, rectangular object they find.  (In fact, her 18 month old brother turns every  relatively flat, rectangular object into a phone and walks around babbling into it.  Not much different than the rest of us, except his train of thought is not interrupted by someone else babbling into his ear.) I was reminded of that when my chavrusa (who has children my grandchildrens age) and I were learning about אוושא מילתא.  It came up because of a quote from the Shulchan Aruch HaRav that referred to the noise of תקתוק