KMTT - the Torah Podcast
KMTT - Berachot #12
KMTT - Berachot #12, by Rav Ezra Bick
KMTT. Kimi Tionte, Taitou A. This is KMTT. And this is as we begin today is Wednesday. Alif Av, Rosh Rosh Av. Diggma says michineh nah s Av. Me mah atim bissimcha. That is Allahic Manifestations, many of which we've extended to back with Tashiva Salba Tamuz, but the fear that happened in the beginning of Rosh Av, when limits, when Simcha mamam atim bissimcha, as well as hash gaffa implications. So, a sapphic, lifestyle implications. It's a month of sadness, of commemoration, and of Chura. And this is also the last week of the summer session of KMTT. Today, tomorrow, Friday will be the last broadcast, and we'll take more for Cholish Av. We'll be back in the beginning of Cholish Alul, with a totally new program. Today's shure is a shure on the sakab rachot alaqaba rachadah, which I will be giving, afterwards be a madrasi or me, the daily madrasi. But now the regular shure. For today's shure, I wish to continue, actually go backwards and continue the madrasi then I quoted last week. And in truth, this time, halaqaba rachadah will be stretching it a bit, it's basically a gada, and it has practical implications, many, many practical implications, but it will be hard to codify what we're going to learn today as a halaqaba. If you remember, I read last week the story, and I'll read it again, the story of Chisqiao and Yishayao. You can remember, it begins on the funeral of Manalif, Amrava Munna, Ma'idr Dev, Mi kehachacham, umi udea peshid davar, who is wise, and who knows the meaning of the madras, but peshid davar, the meaning of the madras, could also be read as Pshara, the compromise of the madras. The answer is, who is the great compromise, Akadosh Barucho? Because he arranged a compromise between Yishayao and Chisqiao, and I'm going to talk today about what exactly was the personal problem that involved Yishayao and Chisqiao. Neither one was willing to go see the other in the Chisqiao, arranged a compromise by having Chisqiao be sick, and Yishayao had to come visit him. But now we're going to the point of Yishayao's sickness, and what Yishayao said. Yishayao went to visit Chisqiao, who was sick, by yamimahim, hara Chisqiao, the motive, by a boy. Yishayao, Ben Amrava, Tana V, by Yoma, Iraav, Koh, Amr, Hashem, Tsevv, Eitrcha, Kimait Ata, Velotirja. In those days, Chisqiao was sick unto death, and Yishayao, Ben Amrava, the prophet, came to him and said to him, "Thus saith God, command your house." In other words, very well, "Command to your house, for you are to die, and you will not live." So the girl asks, "My ki mate Ata, Velotirja, you're going to die and not live. It's redundant. If you're dying, you're not going to live." What does it mean, "Kimait Ata, Velotirja, mate Ata, Velotirja, Velotirja, Velotirja, Velotirja, Velotirja. You're going to die in this world, and you will not live in the next world. It's an extraordinary decree. You're going to be wiped out, exterminated, both in this world and the next world. So Chisqiao asks the question, "My kuli hai?" He said in his lifetime, so it could be that he gets the word he's going to die, even though he's quite young at this time, but still, everyone dies, so there's never thousands going to die. He will never have been shot, but he's losing his portion in the world to come. "My kuli hai, what have I done? What is so terrible?" Amalaymi Shumdala Asakta be Piriave Rivya, because you are not engaged in procreation. Chisqiao was not married, and he had no children. We'll come back to this point as well. It's an interesting point. Why is the sin of not engaging in procreation that's serious, that one dies and has no portion in the world to come? It's a mid-stop. I'm trying to imagine. We don't find this sort of decree against people who've missed that another mid-stop. So, this is not a main point today. As an aside, the explanation that I've usually heard, nothing original being said here now, but the explanation that you've usually heard is the following. Nigma says that if you ask Hochma, if you ask wisdom, pure wisdom, what is the fate of the sinner? As Hochma or Merritt, Ish Bereto Yumat. Listen, sins is dead. Why does wisdom say that? Because that's the rational answer. Being alive is fulfilling the will of God. Being existed. They put a little more extreme. That something should exist because of the will of God. Nothing can exist without the will of God. And God said, let there be a will, therefore there is a world. If you exist in a manner other than the way that God commanded, then you don't exist at all. Because God said, be thus. You can't be any other way. So, if a person sins, he doesn't exist. And that's doesn't exist. And this one doesn't exist in the next world. That's what Hochma says. Just pointing out. It more than asks other people. It asks Chuvai, it asks Tala, it asks Nivuan. You get other answers. The Torah is more complicated than just pure rationality. But the rational answer is Ish Bereto Yumat. The reward, the gain, the result of sin, is non-existence. So, why do sines exist? So, the answer given is that God wants it to be a world. Famous, famous medrich brought in the beginning of the Torah by Rashi. As to why the first portion of the Torah, it says Elo Kim. And then it says Hashem Elo Kim. And the second portion. And the answer is that God wished to create the world. Le fi midata din by strict, rational justice. And then he saw the world could not exist. As it made us live it later, made us by Abhamavina beginning. Well, Hocha says Abhamavina says to God, "If there's a world, there is no din. And if there's din, there is no world. Can't have them both." So, what did God do? He combined the Vahamimidin. He combined mercy with justice. And that's what it means, the name of God Hashem Elo Kim. Elo Kim is justice. Hashem Elo Kim is mercy and justice. And that's how the world will start to speak and be created. So, why is it that sinners exist? Why can sin exist in this world? Because God wants there to be a world. And therefore, he suffers the existence of sin. But if we would not for God's desire that the world should continue to exist, then rationality says, "Eish pakatou yumat." So, a person sins, he'll continue existent. He can do chuva. He can hope for the future, because God has a basic commitment to the existence of the world despite the presence of sin. But if someone chooses not to engage in pyyeverly the air, that means he himself is not investing in the continued existence of the world, of the human world. He is not committed to the future, to the future generations. Then he loses out on the ability to claim existence on the basis of that God wants it to be a world. If you're invested in the future, then God's investment and commitment to the future will bridge the gap between your lack of basis for existence and your actual existence. But if you yourself have cut off, you're totally uninterested, you're not doing anything for the future of the world, then you go back to being din. You go back to being the first passion that I have. Just din, just justice, just chuva-lokim. And by that basis, then any sin, including the sin of not being in pyyeverly, if you have not doing pyyeverly, if you're not engaging in procreation, or any other sin, will in fact result in your immediate non-existence. It's a cute explanation. Obviously, there's another explanation altogether, which we have to do with the fact that something really very, very terrible, mildly, about the sin of non-engaging in procreation, that must have been another place, and we started with this non-engaging in procreation. It's as though he has shed blood. Not making a new human being is equivalent, morally, to killing an existing one. And murder, obviously, we know, is quite a serious sin, although you will not find any place in Tom Woodward says that he who does murder has no portion in the world to come. But to get back to Agama, Yishaya was told, "Chiskel is going to die." Because he did not engage in pyyeverly, but on a day, Chiskel says, too, Yishayao. "Mishum de chazayli b'roja kaudesh to nafkimi nafkimi nafkimi nafkimi nafkimi nafkimi nafmimi nafkimi lomalo." He justifies his non-fulfillment of pyramid of yah. And he says, "The reason is because I saw b'roja kaudesh. I had a vision. I was given the information in a form of prophecy, in a divine spirit, that any children I have, any children that I would have, would not be proper, there will be a shayim." They would not, they would not justify their existence. And therefore I preferred, I chose that it's better not to have children, that they have children who would be lomalo, who would be in proper, who would be bad. Yishayao answered him, "Amalo bahadi kafshidarachmana lama lah." In these hidden things of God, kafshidarachmana dbarim kibushim, the things that God has kept secret from us. In these hidden secrets of God, what are you, what is it to you? "My de maafkidat y bai rachlem evad." Umar de nika kamekuchabriqo, lay of it. That which you are commanded to do, you have to do. And God, whatever He wants to do, He will do. Okay, the conversation continues, which we quoted last week, about Kaskiao wished to marry then the daughter of Yishayao and Yishayao objective. Kaskiao told him, "There's always hope in the future that was our discussion last week." Now I wish to concentrate on this first part of the story. Yishayao told Kaskiao successfully, Kaskiao accepted the argument, "Bahadi kafshidarachmana lama lah." What are you bothering your head if the hidden matters of God? What is the meaning, what is the practical meaning, what is the implication of this phase? Someone says that He's figured out that the best thing to do is this or that, and you say to Him, this is a phase that you pit yourself in Jewish history. It's a very famous kamana. Someone says to you, "Well, I have this theory and I'm going to act this way or that way because I'm trying to do something in the future." And you say to Him, "Bahadi kafshidarachmana lama lah." What do you bother in your head? What are you bringing up all sorts of considerations of esoteric hidden matters? "My de y bai rach, my de maafkidat y bai rachlem evad." You have to do what you are commanded to do. You have to do your job. And the rest, that's for God to do whatever is fit in His eyes. We do what we have to do, things that are in our control, that are in our obligation, that are our responsibility, we have to do. And the things that are out of our control, God's hands, He can do whatever He wants. On the face of it, you have here a recommendation towards God and He will rach katam. Person should not have a big head. You should have a little head. What does it mean? It's basically it's an army expression as well. Rach katam means that you're in charge of your two square feet. You don't have to look beyond it. Everything else isn't someone else's problem. You take care of your little world and if everything falls apart in the surroundings, that's not your problem. That's sort of what sounds like you say. I was saying to him, "Ahadikat shidaka madalama, what are you looking into God's matters?" And the ultimate rach godaw is to try to take care of what God is supposed to be taking care of. Sometimes you hear this, and sometimes I felt it myself. We're talking living in Israel. Some national Jewish matters are our concern. Sometimes you feel like saying, "You're in charge of daladama, you're in charge of your four cubits, your two square meters." Army cell taking care of the whole nation of Israel, that's God's problem. You take care of your house, take care of maybe your community, your children, but to start thinking, "What's good for Army cell?" That's not your business. Is that what the gamma is saying? This gamma, it's very famous gamma. It's commented on by everybody. You can mention a few, a few names, a few possible implications, and then I'll tell you what I usually think. It's possible, it's possible to understand this gamma in a very restricted manner as talking specifically about children. In the Southwark, for instance, I'm not sure he means to limit it, but at least his example is limited. The Southwark says, you know, you're talking about whether people should exist or not, whether you should have children. So you have seen, because gamma is seen, but go a kawdish that the children will not be good children. None of us have a kawdish, but sometimes you can imagine, and you say, "This world is not a good world." The conditions are that he won't get a kawdish, whatever, it's better not have children at all. So Kaskil knew in a much more short basis, he had ruha kawdish. The children will not be good children. And therefore, you make a conclusion, it's better to have them. So Kaskil says, "Yeah, but there were other implications. What happened is Kaskil's son is called Manashev. Manashev was the worst king ever, the worst of all kings." Well, it says that the Batamiktash was destroyed because of the sins of Manashev, but the success of it. Manashev was a terrible, terrible king. But, that's all it points out, after Manashev died, came Yoshiyyau, who was a good king. And the Shiyacht Sitkainu, the next king will be a descendant of the Davidic line, had Kaskil not had any children, the Davidic line would have been extinguished. So in the immediate future, you have Manashev, but there are always more implications. So how can you say that I'm not going to have any children because the implications are bad? You do what you have to do, and God will find something good to come in. In other words, first of all, his comment is, I think some of the Russians say it explicitly, it's about the future children. A human being, you think the human being is bad, there are always good things to come from human being. So then it's a comment, it's an important comment. It's a comment about the value of people. To make a value judgment, it's about a person that you're saying is Kaskil de Rakhmana. That's the hidden manners of God. What's more, the way that Sadaq explains it, it's not that there might be, there will be. And Sadaq says every human being has some good sparks which come of him, every human life is part of a chain, of being, and to eliminate one of them will have a terrible effect on the totality of the chain. Even though there's some good things that will come of it. You could use this as an argument against capital punishment if you want it. I don't think we've said it meant it that way, but to absolutely wipe out a human being, they shouldn't even be born. So there's no such thing as human being who does not have some, leave some seed which will ultimately become part of the picture, the tapestry of God's plan in the world. So I'm saying this is, it's a powerful idea, but it's restricted to the value of future human beings. Okay, they wouldn't have implications for our general life, although you could extrapolate with Sadaq's principle more more widely. Any situation, you think it's bad, who knows what can come of it. You know, you also thought Sadaq was sold into slavery, it's a terrible thing, but he eventually saved, as we also put the Atos brothers, you thought to do evil, but God brings good things out of evil situations. Again, as far as I remember, Sadaq said it explicitly and specifically about the value of future generations. He says it's talking specifically about mid-sos. As it was said, "May demaqkidakh alaqah love it," that which you are commanded to do, you have to do. Now, they explain this to me, I was talking about the relationship between mid-sos, the obligation to do mid-sos, and t'ame'am mid-sot, the reasons for mid-sot. All mid-sot have reasons, but it's none of you business. In other words, we could sometimes imagine, I know the reason why this mid-sos is being given. It's given to maximize this good. In this particular case, it won't maximize, because if I'm not obligated to do it, or in a somewhat more extreme fashion, certain prohibitions are given because they will produce a certain bad effect. So, I believe, and I'm pretty sure I'm correct. Sometimes it's even explicitly telling you, you know, why certain things are so. They're prohibited because they have a certain evil effect, but in these particular conditions, in the country, doing the prohibition of a good effect, Fami Surah. So, if Haim says, "You know how to do that," in the pre-C night times, people like Avamitsa Kinyakov would weigh each thing in terms of all its implications, ramifications, but once the Torah is given, once abrogation is given, the whole point of of Haim is the difference between doing good things and being abrogated. So, we sometimes do good things, and you measure how good is it, but once the Torah has commanded, the king has said to do it, then that freeze or removes from you, judging the results of the mid-sos. You have to eat matzah, because this will remind you of what it means to be a slave, but you have to eat matzah on any of it, whether you remember what you want, remember, whether it's convenient or inconvenient, whether it's good or it's not good, obligations become absolute, and Tama'an mitzvah is the background, it's philosophic, it's a luxury, which one can engage into deep as one's appreciation, but cannot ever be the reason to free one or change an obligation that really exists. So, of Haim's incentives come out in terms of particular the theology of mitzvah, the idea that very essential Judaism, that the Torah doesn't suggest how we should live or guide us in finding the good, the Torah obligates. Everna shem, you're a servant of God, and the servant of God doesn't question what he's being told to do, not because he's too stupid to question, because it's simply not his role. He does what he's told to do and leads to the king to decide what one should, one should command. This is Haim in the Safer in the Nephi Shachaim, that's how Haim explains this command. But I think most of us should have understood the command in much more general sense. It's having to do with a bit of bittachan. It has to do with, we've been told to do a certain thing, it appears to us that it's not going to work out. You should have faith, you should have bittachan in God. It's not completely dependent on you, of course it's true that mitzvah are given in order to achieve a certain goal, and if God didn't think that we could achieve the goal he wouldn't have told us to do it. So it's true, when I do a mitzvah, because I believe that my doing it will have a good effect. But we have to understand that it's never a hundred percent like that. Ultimately everything depends on God's will, not on all will. I give stuck it to a poor person to help him. But I shouldn't imagine that the poor person's welfare is one hundred percent dependent on me. It's not true, it's dependent on God. And therefore, although there is a general correlation between the goals of its vote and its vote, or any choice I make, but nonetheless you should realize that God can always change it one way or the other. It's really up to him in the end. And therefore, my desire to do good is also based one on my belief that I have the ability to do good. Two, my trust in God that he will fulfill, that he will develop and support the consequences and modifications of my actions. So I should try to decide what's the best thing to do, and then believe and hope, have trust and faith that God will fulfill it. That's how I'm now quoting what I just said now is basically a quote in the comment of the old Israel, the optorov to this Khmer, but I think this is found in a lot of other sources as well, acidic sources and muscle sources. This is what the Khmer is saying. You say, oh, it says, don't be so smart. You can't a hundred percent control the world. So it's true that one has children, not just have children. Another kind of success because all children are good. You have children because you want to have good children. And it doesn't make sense to deliberately have bad children. If I knew for a hundred percent that I'd be producing evil people, I wouldn't produce them, but who are you to make that decision? Your answer, but this Khmer says, what Khmer Kaudesh, what the old Israel says is very appropriate for us. I think that if I do A, B, C, O, D, it'll have a bad effect, but I can't be sure, but sure it's a scale, what's sure? So then the answer is apparently they even work a Khmer. This fills in very well with the continuation of the Khmer that we talked about last week. But after Khmer said to Yishayou, let me marry your daughter and Yishayou said to him, "I know you're going to die." So I'm not going to give you my daughter. So then Khmer Kaudesh, he says to him, "Brahmat, say me, the Bhuatra, leave the room. You've finished prophesying. I know that a filiqhe'il Khairab Khadamu, Nakhad L'Allah, Sava Roshadadadam, Aayit Eishmana Purandut, even after there is a decree of heaven and the sword is on your neck, it can be changed." So here, although the roles were reversed, Yishayou is in effect saying a very, very similar thing to Khairab. You know Bhuokha Khadesh, you're not going to have a good child. You're supposed to have children. The reason we have children is because we hope and pray and tend to invest and educate. They should be wonderful people. So you do yours, things that are not in your control, are not in your control, but you can always succeed. You have to have faith in God that you will succeed or else you won't do anything at all. If you're not a faith in God, then you won't do anything at all. The truth is, when you look at this mama, I think that basically the Aubisaw is correct. But you do have to understand it in terms of the Gamais context. And the context is, as the Gamais says, "Mai de maafkadat," that which you have been commanded. The Gamais isn't, indeed, a bad relationship between obligations and plans. We have a general equilibrium obligation. We have a general obligation to better the one, but we have specific obligations, which we derive from Torah, Tayyag Mitzvaht, and other kinds of specific obligations. I think it's not only about Mitzvaht or the Torah. It is true, when I mentioned it first, I used the beginning, this Roshkatan veroshkadol, big head and small head. So the Torah is definitely not against Roshkadol. Roshkadol is the definition of a Jew. However, Roshkatan is primary. In other words, you are more obligated to take care of your dollar amount than of the whole world. This reflects a famous "Halaqa" in "Hilhot-Staka," "A nie eer Haqad." It's a philosophical debate today about whether or not that's a very point. Are we, in fact, as obligated to take care of the Starving Church of India as my next door neighbor? Prominent philosopher in the United States. Strange and problematic, I think, in immoral philosophy in the United States. But a permanent philosophy in the United States is suggested that to give your next door neighbor or to care for your parents in a manner greater than one cares for the poor of India is immoral. The Torah doesn't think so. "Halaqa" Judaism says, "A nie eer Haqad nie." And my family, even yourself, to some extent, is Qaddam. The closer you are to something, you have a relatively absolute obligation to take care of yourself, and a great obligation to take care of your family, and a pretty great obligation to take care of your community, and a much less obligation to take care of the whole world. So that's in terms of stalker. So here I think it's in terms of even the way we think about the world. It would be wonderful if we thought about making the whole world better and think about the next generation in Qaskal's case and in the future generations. But that can't undermine the fact that I'm, first of all, committed to two seconds from now, and Dao and Amart. So it's a complicated question because sometimes you can be more obligated to take care of what's going to happen tomorrow and what's going to happen next week. But what's happening next week is so overwhelming that it will, in fact, overwhelm what I should do tomorrow. You can't be that Roshka-tan. I'm going to put the nail in the hole. Even though I suspect that tomorrow, this is going to cause the whole building to blow up. It's, it's, the matter has been installed though. Here it's expressed absolutely. It has been understood relatively. You cannot automatically say that I am obligated only to the whole world, future generations, Bahadi kafshidir rachmanah. Indeed, the kamawi is stating that some things are in God's hands and some things are in your hands. If you ask me what is Jewish and believe about this, I would say there is no absolute border between the two. In fact, God takes responsibility for the smallest things in my life, and I have a measure of general responsibility for everything that I possibly can, can affect if it's in my power to, to emulate the situation of the starving children in India, then I think I should be taking care of that as well. But at some point, there is a border here. It can't be well defined, but there is a border between kafshidir rachmanah and maidamafkadat. Those things which have been given to you to be responsible, it wasn't meant to be obligated. It means that God has said, I'm appointing you to be in charge of this. So for instance, God makes me responsible for my children's education, not the community. It says, "Mishinatam le vannecha." So the Torah says, "Who's going to take care of your children?" You are. Now the community is also obligated. That's why at a certain point in Jewish history, Jewish communities took responsibility of making schools because they saw they did a better job than an individual, but the the abrogation is, in fact, in your hands and therefore the responsibilities in your hands. Certain things God has not put into your responsibility. It's good to be concerned about them, but I am not responsible for world peace. God is responsible for that. Now given that those those axioms, when you in fact measure, when there's a conflict between these different levels, so I can't tell you in advance which one will win, but there's a different weight to be given to trying to make sure that a future generation or a future child or something that's far away from my home will be in a certain state of good and my necessity to take responsibility for for the here and the now. We can think of many many cases like this, which in fact, unlike of Chaim, don't involve Mitzvot and Tamayah Mitzvot. I have to decide, for instance, I'm just giving you an example that's simply taken out of today's newspaper. Family lives up in Chayfa. Family lives in Akko, Kiyachemona, Inferia. Our enemies, Sunday Hashem, enemies of the Jewish people, enemies of God, are sending rockets. You have to decide, do you take your family and leave? Will you take your family and leave? You know someone will say there has a bad effect on General morale. Maybe you should stay to keep up to keep people happy. I hear that. That's a good point. I also hear the answer. Are you agree? It would be good if we would stay here. Each and every one of us make a decision to stay and that would help the entire country. On the other hand, I have a greater obligation to taking care of my family than to taking care of the morale of the whole city of Chayfa. Now we have to decide how much is each one affected. I don't think it will be justified to give a small benefit to my family on the basis of a large penalty, a large detriment to the general community. Isn't a hard and fixed rule here, but tomorrow is, in fact, saying that some things are not your responsibility to catch Shida Akmana. They're the hidden manners of God. And how do we know that? What's really Kachida Akmana because it's Kachida? Those things which are beyond our ability to know. Things which we can predict with the means that are in our hands are giving to us. If God gives us the knowledge, He also gives us the obligation. How your future generations will act, even though you know the Ruha Kodesh, because you're a prophet, but it's still Ruha Kodesh. It hasn't been handed over to man. Here's a religious faith in the theological statement being made. Sometimes people can know things that they're not meant to know. Those things which are scientific, God has given to man. And if He gives you the scientific means to know or to affect, then He also gives you the responsibility to do so. But things which are hidden, to us, that means that they're still unknown or uncertain. And even if they are certain, because you have Ruha Kodesh, but they're not in your domain, so they can't possibly be your responsibility, in terms of the word responsibility. If they're not your responsibility, then they do, in fact, have second place. Those of which are your responsibility. And non-responsibility cannot trump a responsibility. And here, when Chaim is right, since you're obligated to have children, it's a mitzvah. So Ruha Kodesh and the Ruha cannot change those things. Is there a general rule? I don't think there's a general rule here, which is why it's in the beginning. I don't think we are talking halacha. Is there a general direction here? Yes. The direction here is that a person should realize what he has to do, because he's the one in charge, the world consists of divisions of responsibility. And as a Jew, we have responsibilities, which is expressed in mitzvah and obligations and responsibilities to the world that is around us. And there are certain things which are good things, and you should be concerned about them. But they're not as great of responsibility, or they're not responsibilities at all. So they're things which we can affect, but they don't things which we have to affect. And then the Torah says, make sure you keep your priorities correct. Someone who sacrifices his own family, or his own world, in order to win another peace prize has a distorted sense of priorities, not when viewed as to what's more important. It could be that world peace is more important than the world for my family. But we don't view the world through the eyes of benefits. We view the world through the eyes of responsibility, of obligation, of mitzvah. And that which you are commanded, you have to do. And to a certain extent, God will do what he wants in the areas which are left to his to his control. And that's it for today. And that's the last year in the series. I want to thank all those who have been listening. I'd like to thank those who occasionally write in. And I thank in the future those who will write in now that the series has finished. I enjoyed very much giving this and giving an opportunity to review quite a number of gm about which I've sort of more or less forgotten about. And in Eloh, or after a circus perhaps, and even in the future, I hope to be back with other series in KMTT, and now for the Medarash Hayumi. In Pashat de Varem, after Mashabena lists the different places they've been in the Medbar, trash explains as a subtle form of rebuke because in all those places there have been sins and complaints against God, Mashabena then has, how does the Pashir ka shammadok e khem hibah ekhem in khem hayon khok vaiash maimahov. He gives them basically a vah, says God has has multiplied you, and you are today like the stars of the heaven, laurov in the multitude. Medarash says, amalaham hayon mathem khok vin, abadatid laurov, in other words, in khem hayon khok vaiash mayin laurov, the laurov is not necessary. Today you are like the stars of the sky, so what does it mean laurov, so that understands it as being this is the second stage. Today you are like the stars of the sky, but you're on your way to be la, lamir is a means two, right, it indicates in this case the future, in the future you will be rov, or rav. Medarash explains what that means, ayon mathem khok vin, abadatid laurov, laurov, atematidun yod domim lir rav khem, it understands laurov like laurav. Today you are like stars, tomorrow you will be like the master, who's the master, of course he means God himself, katesa, tritiv, khan, kya shammadok ekha ekha, ekha ekha, ekha ekha ekha ekha ekha ekha ekha ekha ekha ekha ekha ekha ekha ekha, God is described as being a devouring fire, a living fire, and so you shayah says about the jewish people in the future that the light of israel will be like a fire and his holiness like a flame. What does this mean? Medarash is saying today you are like the stars, in the future you will be like a flame. I think the meaning is after all the jews here are in fact a great large people, 600,000 males over the age of 20 and they're about to enter eretisrael where they will conquer and they'll become a nation. There will be one nation out of many in the world, so God says to them you are like the stars of the sky, but what's the special about the stars of the sky? I'm the fact that there are so many, but this measure is changing that part. What is special about the stars? You can see them, they shine, they're distinct and therefore they're important, they stand out, they're not invisible and they're not, they can't be obliterated, but of course we all know that the stars in the sky give no warmth. You can see them, but they don't give you the ability to say anything else, they don't provide light and they show you don't provide warmth. A flame gives two things, it gives light, and it gives warmth. And I think what the marriage is saying is, remember this is the beginning of the jewish people here. I'm not sure I've been saying to them, okay we've gotten to the mid-bao, we've gotten to the desert, now we're a people and we're going to take our place, our right for place among the nations. We're going to have our own land and we're going to eliminate ourselves, but that only makes you like a star or like the stars of the sky. You will, you will be there. You will, you will not be overshadowed by others, but you don't affect the rest of the world. And the state of the jews in the world is that they exist, they affect themselves, they develop closeness to God, to share, they become their gods people, but they don't correct the rest of the world, they don't enlighten the rest of the world, they don't warm the rest of the world. The existence of the jewish people will be the light to others, it'll be like a flame, but yeah, all you say is light God himself, God doesn't exist so that he should exist, but we should see him. God is the light onto the world, God is the warmth of the world, God is the fire which lights up the world. And in the future, well not sure Ben was saying, it's a long future, you're now starting, you have to start your own history, you don't have to be concerned about this, now you're going to be like a kohavim. But he's really telling them that being like a kohavim, being the jewish people in areas as well, developing a national existence within the framework of the world will eventually, Adi Matamashir, will eventually transform the world itself by being a fire and a flame, by yeah, all you saw, the ash, uktor shawli lehava. And that's all for today. You've been listening to the shawli on the second bar, kohat al ashir, on the second bar, kohat al al ashava, bagadah, 13 part series we had in the summer, the summer session of KMTT, and the daily madrash. And this is Esubic, wishing you a kohlto, you've been listening to KMTT, the Torah podcast, kimitsione tezeit torah, tomorrow's shiyur in poshata shavua, for poshata verim, followed by Friday's air shabbat program, which will complete our programming for this summer. We should give you kohlto, vibhukat a torah mitzion, kvaitim la torah, have regular Torah, time periods, and we'll be back in the future. kimitsione tezeit torah, udvarashan, miyohushalayim.