Skip to content
TrackPodcasts
religionJan 16, 20264:17

Can You Give Me a Ride to Lakewood

Get every episode summarized

Each time 5 minutes a Day on the Parsha with Yiddy Klein publishes, we email you a written briefing from the transcript — the topics, who appeared, and any specific claims, with the ad reads skipped.

Email me new episodes

Free for 3 shows. No card needed.

About this episode

Hosts & guests

Transcript ready

71 searchable segments. Every word is indexed and playable.

Can You Give Me a Ride to Lakewood

5 minutes a Day on the Parsha with Yiddy Klein

0:00
4:17

Full transcript

5 minutes a Day on the Parsha with Yiddy Klein — Can You Give Me a Ride to Lakewood. Machine-transcribed; use the interactive transcript above to jump the player to any line.

This Torah class is brought to you by Torahanytime.com In Pasha's veera, we'll read about the first seven Makas that Hashem bought upon its reign. Interestingly, it is Aharn and Atmoysha who initiates the first three Makas. Aharn strikes the water to turn it into blood and also to bring the plague of Cifada'a and he also strikes the earth to bring forth the third Maka, kinam. So why Aharn? Why Not Moysha? Sir Asha quoting Khazal explains that this was because of our Kharsatife, the Nile had protected Moysha when he was placed in the water as a baby, so Moysha would not strike the water. Similarly, Moysha did not strike the ground to bring forth kinam because the earth protected him when he killed the Egyptian and buried him in the sand. But the question is, the water did not protect Moysha if anything the basket protected Moysha. Not the river, any baby that was placed in the water, the water drowned them.

Likewise, the sand did not leap up to conceal the Egyptian. It remained where it was that they didn't perform any special action to help Moysha. And besides that, the water and the earth are inanimate objects. They don't have any feelings, they don't have behera, they don't have intent. So why was Moysha required to show Aharn's Atmoysha to them? And the answer teaches us the depth of a Kharsatife. Gratitude is not about the benefactor, it is about the beneficiary. If someone does you a favor, if you receive benefit from someone, don't make any Hashbina's. He gave me a right to lake with big deal, he was going there anyway. He's flying to Israel, what's one more bag in the suitcase? They invited us for Shabbos, she was cooking anyway, what's a few more beans in the child. And besides, we're great company, they would be bored without us. When the shul makes an appeal, you have no choice to make. You can say, they clean every day, so I have a clean by smadrish. They provide svaram, so I have a nice selection to choose from.

They provide heat in the winter, AC in the summer, so now I can dive in and learn comfortably. All for my benefit, so I must donate generously, or you can say, they have to turn on the lights anyway. They have to run the AC regardless. My presence doesn't really cause the shul anything. They are countless excuses to void gratitude, but Mosheur Bain was teaching us the depth of a carcetive. I benefit it, and that obligates me to express thanks. And that is why Mosheur refrained from initiating the first three macas. Even though water and earth have no feelings, but Moshe demonstrated appreciation for the benefit that he received. The altar from Sabotka says something so beautiful. In parches, when Joseph, the visor of Egypt, realized that his royal becher was missing, he tells his people, go quickly, run after those people, pursue those men. And when you reach them, say to them, lomba shalom tam raw taqas toiva. I hosted you. I gave you food, I gave you clothing, I gave you money, and this is how you repay me.

By swiping my silver becher, you are a coffee toy. Ask the altar, why don't you say, you guys are a bunch of thieves. I invited you into my palace, I treat you like royalty, and you steal the king's becher. You guys are a bunch of criminals. Why was it being so soft? Lomba shalom tam raw taqas toiva. Why so idol? Says the altar. It seems from here that being a coffee toy is worse than being a thief. We refer from this incident that being an ingrate, not having a carcetive, is a greater character flaw than even being a ganaf. And that is why you always have confronted them, not as thieves, but as people not having a carcetive. So if Mochorabeno could show gratitude to water and sand, how much more so must we show gratitude to the people in our lives? And if you train yourself to notice every kindness, no matter how small, you will never live in a world of complaints, but in a world filled with hesed and genuine happiness.

Now, we know. Have a wonderful day. You've just experienced another Torah class brought to you back to Torahanytime.com. Now, we know. Have a wonderful day.

More episodes

More from 5 minutes a Day on the Parsha with Yiddy Klein

View all episodes →