Parshat Va'era
28 Tevet 5762
January 12, 2002
Daf Yomi: Baba Metzia 51


Guest Rabbi:
Rabbi Shalom Rubanowitz
Young Israel of Los Angeles, CA

"Hain Bnai Yisrael Lo Shom'u Ailay, Vaich Yishmaeinee Phaaroh, Va'ani Aral Sfasayim."
"Behold, the children of Israel have not listened to me, how will Pharaoh listen to me? And I have sealed lips." (Shemos 6:12)

According to Rashi, this is one of the ten "Kal VaChomers" referenced in the Torah. The Kal VaChomer--one of the thirteen tools through which the Torah is interpreted�is best defined by the Latin, "a fortiori". As defined in the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary: "Latin, literally, from the stronger (argument), with greater reason or more convincing force -- used in drawing a conclusion that is inferred to be even more certain than another .� Or as another popular definition goes, "This is a Latin expression which literally means with greater force. In logic, it is where, having made or established a large point, a minor point, subsumed in the larger point, is made at the same time; thus, there is no need to argue the validity of the minor point."

In short, the above phrase would be interpreted as follows: "if the Jewish people did not listen to me, than how much more so will Pharaoh not listen to me". And this would seem to make sense. After all, the Jewish people, slaves who surely desired their freedom, had every motivation to listen to their own son and brother, Moshe Rabbeinu, deliver a message of salvation, whereas Pharaoh, the enslaver, had every motivation to ignore such a message. Hence, the rendering of what appears to be a powerful Kal VaChomer.

I do believe however, that the above logical argument appears to contain a serious flaw. In Gemmora parlance the challenge to this logic would be called a Pircha, which is as follows:

Earlier in the Parsha, the Torah gives us an explicit reason why Bnai Yisrael, the children of Israel did not listen to Moshe: "Vlo Sham'u el Moshe Mikotzer Ruach Umai'Avodah Kasha" - "they did not listen to Moshe from shortness of breath and hard labor" (Shemos 6:9). Thus, a perfectly legitimate and cogent reason is given for their lack of heeding to Moshe's words. They were enslaved. They were hard-worked and downtrodden. Harried workers do not have the peace of mind to luxuriate in the soothing preachings of a would-be savior. But how can such an argument be made for Pharaoh's inability to listen to Moshe? Pharaoh was ruler! Time belonged to him! He was neither "short-breathed" nor over-worked! Pharaoh had all the time and peace of mind in the world to listen to Moshe! The question is thus obvious: How do our Rabbis view the above-referred phrase as one of the ten Kal Vachomers found in the Torah, where the Torah itself provides reasoning which negates any basis for any such a deduction?

Allow me to note yet another difficulty with the above verse. It appears, that Moshe provides additional reasoning for his charge that Bnai Yisrael will not heed his words, by concluding his argument with this: "Va'ani Aral Sefasayim"�"and I am covered of lip" (I have a speech defect!). After Moshe clearly articulates the Kal Vachomer, he seems to add another, unrelated reason�his speech defect. This seems to be a very separate, valid, albeit independent argument�I cannot speak well! The difficulty with this however, is in understanding why Moshe seems to find the need to provide an additional argument above the heretofore-cited Kal VaChomer, and further, in that two separate reasons are provided for Bnai Yisrael's improbable heeding of Moshe's words, why are these two independent reasons juxtaposed in a way in which they appear to be stated as one answer?

An enlightening view of the possible nature of Moshe Rabbeinu's purported speech defect, and hence an understanding of the source of the gift of speech itself, may provide an eye-opening solution to the above-posed queries. In the story of creation, the Torah states, "Vayeepach B'apov Nishmas Chaim" - "and He blew into his nostrils the soul of life" (Bereishis 2:7). In translating, nay, interpreting this, the Targum Unkelus says "Unfach B'Anpohi Nishmasa D'Chayii, VaHavas B'adam L'Ruach Memalela"�"and He blew into his nostrils/face the soul of life, and it became in man to be the spirit of speech". Thus, Unkelus equates Nishmas Chaim, the soul of life, our very neshama, with the "Ruach" the power and ability to speak. Our level of G-dliness, our very Neshama, is manifested through our capacity for speech. The lessons contained in this are profound and deep. Our talk represents the spark of G-d that has been planted within us. The necessary logic thus flows: Our speech, how we say things, when we say things, what we say, reflects our G-dliness, the level of Kedusha and holiness within us, and reversely, the level of our Kedusha and G-dliness reflects the level and refined nature of our speech, and the capacity for language which we have achieved.

The Torah tells us that Bnai Yisrael could not listen on account of their "Kotzer Ruach". Armed with our newfound definition of "Ruach", I suggest the Passuk be read as follows: "Bnai Yisrael as our Rabbis tell us, were almost at the lowest possible state of Kedusha�they reached Mem Tes Shaarei Tumah-the 49th level (out of fifty) of impurity. Moshe Rabbeinu, who brought the message of a deliverance in which they can serve the one HaShem free from a life of servitude to Egyptian masters and values, knew that there was a deep language barrier between himself and his people. Moshe had just spoken with HaShem, and thus reached the utmost refinement of his own "language", but what language did Bnai Yisrael speak? On what common spiritual grounds can they participate in a conversation with him?

Bnai Yisrael did not hear Moshe from Kotzer Ruach"�from a deficiency in the Ruach Memalela", that power of speech�the breath of HaShem with which we were imbibed with at creation. Steeped in idolatry, Egyptian mores and the pathos of the Egyptian lifestyle, a way of life they could not shake off due to the mind-numbing "Avoda Kasha"�the demoralizing workday existence of the lowly slave, they simply did not speak the same language as the man of G-d, Moshe Rabbeinu. Recognizing this, Moshe Rabbeinu says, in the purest form of Kal Vachomer, "if Bnai Yisrael, the children of Israel, who, however subjugated and subsumed by Egyptian society, surely must still have had within their consciousness some memory of their great heritage and some cognizance of the vast spiritual blessings of their forefathers�if they could not hear my words, read: if they could not "speak my language", then how can I expect Pharaoh, king of the Egyptians, the progenitors of the anti-G-d movement and purveyors of all forms of immoral behavior�to understand my words, to relate to my form of communication? Thus, in connection with Pharaoh, says Moshe, I am surely an "Aral Sefasayim" I will surely be unable to find any common spiritual ground and thus any form of common language.

As I write this Dvar Torah, I am in the midst of celebrating, Baruch HaShem, the Bris of my first son, Shlomo Meir. Contemplating the above, I cannot escape noting what I believe is no coincidence: the Mitzvah through which a male is brought into the fold of Yiddishkeit and Torah is called Milah, which also means "word". What reflects our Yiddishkeit are the "words" we use, and our Yiddishkeit is in turn influenced by the words we use. One of the reasons we merited to leave Egypt is "Shelo Shinu es Leshonam", "On account of us preserving our language"; on our maintaining our connection with the seat of our Ruchniyus, our spirituality. As Jews in Galus, we may be forced to use the words of an alien culture, yet we can never be forced to speak a different language. So long as we maintain and refine our spiritual stature, we will always be ready and available to hear and understand the call of our final deliverer, Mashiach Tzidkainu, and have no doubts about the meaning of his message, Bimehairah B'yomeinu, Amein.