An origin answer from the above niftar that he offered on a question that was raised in parshas Mikeitz 5759:

Ch. 41, v. 32: "V'al hishonos ...... pa'amoyim ...... u'm'ma'heir" - We find that Yoseif also had two dreams (37:7,9) but they were not fulfilled for thirteen years or for twenty-two years. Why was there no "um'ma'heir .."?

The gemara Brochos 55b says that the fulfillment of a dream is governed by the interpretation. Yoseif said in his interpretation of Paroh's dream that it would take place right away. Yoseif's dream also should have, but with no one verbalizing this, it did not happen. (Heard from R' M.M.K.)

SEDRAH SELECTIONS PARSHAS VO'ES'CHANAN 5765 BS"D

Ch. 5, v. 17,18: "V'lo saa'neh v'rei'echo eid shov, V'lo sachmode eishes rei'echo" -And you shall not testify against your friend negligible testimony, And you shall not lust your friend's wife - Why is there a conjunctive Vov connecting these two verses? The Baal Haturim answers that a person might falsely testify that someone is dead to allow himself to marry the "widow." (The Rabbis have made an injunction that one who does testify to the death of a husband, he may not marry the widow.)

The Meshech Chochmoh says that with this insight (he quotes the Rashbam, but in our print it is in the Baal Haturim) we understand why the verse here says "shov," - negligible - while in the first set of Commandments it says "sheker," - false. Since this is a prohibition against falsely stating that a husband has died, in the future he will likely appear, and we will see that the testimony is worthless.

Ch. 5, v. 18: "V'lo sachmode eishes rei'echo v'lo sis'aveh beis rei'echo" - And you shall not lust your friend's wife and you shall not lust your friend's house - What is the difference between "chemdoh" and "taavoh"? The Rambam in hilchos g'zeiloh 1:10-12 explains that "taavoh" is lusting and yearning for something, while "chemdoh" is reacting to this lust by taking action to bring it into his possession, even if paying for it after nagging and nagging the owner until he acquiesces.

The Sma"g and Sma"k both disagree, questioning the explanation of the Rambam, "If this were so, then the Torah is stricter with taking someone's wife than with his property. The sin of lusting another's wife is only complete when actually taking her, while by simply lusting someone's home he has already committed a sin. They therefore offer that technically they are the same. The Sma"k adds: Even though the Mechilta clearly states that "lo sachmode" is only with acquiring the object, such as paying for it, the basic sin is transgressed just with the emotion, but lashes are not administered for transgressing unless the object is acquired, to be a transitive sin.

Ch. 5, v. 28: "V'atoh poh amode imodi" - And you stay here with Me - This verse is the source for the opinion that Moshe refrained from marital relations for the rest of his life. After a three-day purification and preparation period of separating from their wives prior to hearing the Ten Commandments, the rest of the bnei Yisroel went back to their tents (verse 27) to resume having marital relations, while Moshe was told to remain with Hashem, i.e. to not resume. However, the M.R. at the end of parshas V'zose Habrochoh says that Moshe restrained from the time of communicating with Hashem by the burning bush. Perhaps at that point he did so voluntarily, while here he received a command. This is in consonance with the words of Tosfos on the gemara Shabbos 87a d.h. "V'atoh poh," that Moshe voluntarily separated from his wife even before Hashem's command, although Tosfos does not say when this began. Tosfos goes on to explain exactly what was Miriam's and Aharon's complaint.

Ch. 6, v. 4: "Shma Yisroel" - Hear Yisroel - This verse is arguably the second most daily repeated verse in all the Torah, as it is said at least four times in our daily prayers. What is the most daily repeated Torah verse?

Ch. 6, v. 4: "Shma Yisroel" - Hear Yisroel - Some halachic commentators say that this verse is the source for our mitzvoh of belief in the One G-d. At the end of World War II Rabbi Eliezer Silver went to Europe to help the recovery effort for the "sheiris hapleitoh," the holocaust survivors. He had the practice of entering churches during the highpoint of the Sunday services, going right up to the front and screaming out the complete verse "Shma Yisroel" in the original Loshon haKodesh. Needless to say, since this wasn't part of the Catholic "nusach" of prayer, whether they were Galicianers or otherwise, it created quite a stir.

A most unfortunate situation took place during the war. Parents who feared for the lives of their young children gave them for safekeeping to their Polish neighbours, hopefully surviving the war, and then to have their children returned to them, or at least to surviving relatives. The church, in the main, felt that they were saving the Jewish souls by not returning them to those whom their parishioners were unsuccessful in killing themselves. Much effort was expended to recover these children, who were oft-times not aware of who their parents were, or had no interest in returning to their roots after experiencing their Polish safe-keepers' influence.

Rabbi Silver, after screaming out "Shma Yisroel," would immediately look at the faces of the young children in attendance. If he sensed a facial response of some recognition of his words he would further investigate the roots of the child, and if he found out that the child was indeed Jewish, he would attempt to bring the child back into the fold, and if possible, also back to his/her parents.

Ch. 6, v. 7: "V'shinantom l'vo'necho" - And you shall inculcate them into your children - The gemara Sanhedrin 19a says that he who teaches Torah to another's child, it is as if the child were born to him. This means that the effort expended by the teacher should be his total being, even to the point of causing himself much pain, "k'ilu y'lodo," just as if he himself went through the labour pains. (Divrei Sholo-m Ve'emes)

The GR"A annotated his "sidur," and wrote in the margin of the paragraph of "Shma" a source for each of the Ten Commandments. He sourced "Lo sirtzach," - Thou shalt not kill - in "v'shinantom l'vo'necho," as our Rabbis have taught, "He who does not teach his son Torah, it is as if he has murdered him."

A Rabbinic assembly took place in S. Peterberg in 1909. A suggestion was made that all Rabbis teach Torah to the young children of their respective communities. This suggestion met with murmurs of discontent, as some felt that it was below their scholarly dignity. The Holy Chofetz Chaim stood up and declared that this was the holiest task for the nation Yisroel, far exceeding the importance of just being a Rabbi, whose responsibilities were basically limited to make halachic rulings.

The Chidushei hoRi"m had thirteen children. When the first twelve r"l died during his lifetime, not a tear was forthcoming. He accepted the Heavenly decree with full faith. However, when his 12th and final child, Rabbi Avrohom Mordechai died, he cried, saying that he now was bereft of the opportunity to fulfill the mitzvoh of "v'shinantom l'vo'necho" with his own biological children. (He told his wife that because of their extremely tragic situation, they would be a comfort for others who lost only one child, similar to the gemara Brochos 5, "Omar Rebbi Yochonon 'Dein garma d'asiro bir.'")

A petitioner came to the Chofetz Chaim, requesting that he pray for the success of his raising his children in the path of Torah. The Chofetz Chaim responded, "Do you expect to educate your children through my blessing?! You must be wiling to sell the pillow under your head to hire a competent, G-d fearing individual to educate your children."

Rabbi Yoseif Chaim Sonnenfeld said that just as the gemara says that he who recites the paragraphs of "Shma" and "V'hoyoh im shomo'a" and does not wear tefillin, it is as if he has given false testimony, so it is with one who sends his children to an institution that does not teach Torah in purity, based on the values of the previous generations.

Although the mitzvoh of teaching ones' children Torah rests squarely on the father, nevertheless, the mother who puts in effort to see that her children receive a Torah-true education, and do not remain ignoramuses (ignorami?), her reward is great. (Sefer Hachinuch)

The mother inculcates Torah values and fear of heaven into her children, as they are most open to receive her influence because she is the more merciful parent. The success of her children in the pursuit of a Torah-based life is in the main to her credit. (Rabbeinu Yonoh in I'geres Ha'teshuvoh)

The insights on this verse were collected by the sefer Mayonos Hanetzach al Tarya"g Mitzvos.

A GUTTEN SHABBOS KODESH. FEEL FREE TO DISTRIBUTE BY COPY OR ELECTRONICALLY.

FEEDBACK IS APPRECIATED. TO SUBSCRIBE, KINDLY SEND REQUEST TO: SHOLOM613@AOL.COM

See also Oroh V'Simchoh - Meshech Chochmoh on the Weekly Parsha and Chasidic Insights