R' Eliezer Hurkenos

 In today's Daf, we explore the concept of evolution and how Chazal (our sages) differ in their approach to the evolutionary process from a halachic perspective. The question arises: Does the changing nature of the world necessitate changes in halacha, or should we adhere to halacha based on historical scientific understandings? 

Beit Shammai argues that halacha should remain unchanged despite shifts in the natural world, while Beit Hillel contends that halacha can evolve over time and adapt based on the insights of each generation, following the proper processes (such as those established by a Sanhedrin).

This perspective likely explains why we predominantly follow Beit Hillel. Halacha is intended to be dynamic, much like nature itself, as both were created by God and entrusted to humanity, reflecting the principle of "Torah lo b'shamayim" (the Torah is not in heaven) and regarding nature-"V'kivshuha" (and we must conquer it).

An interesting point to note involves the renowned Rabbi Eliezer Hurcanus, who was previously mentioned in this tractate. He is described in the tractate Avot as a "בור סוד שאינו מאבד טיפה," meaning "a plastered cistern that doesn’t lose a drop." This metaphor illustrates his role as a student who absorbed knowledge from his teachers like an encyclopedia, adhering strictly to tradition and the teachings he received.

Despite being educated in the yeshivot of Beit Hillel, Rabbi Eliezer chose to follow the rulings of Beit Shammai. He was steadfast in his commitment to tradition and resisted innovation, a trait that ultimately led to his excommunication. The Torah cannot thrive without innovation. Ironically, it was Rabbi Eliezer’s famous student, Rabbi Akiva, who was celebrated for his creativity and innovation, as the Gemara describes how Rabbi Akiva would interpret the crowns of the letters in the Torah.

Below is the Gemara from today's Daf:

אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבָּה בַּר נַחְמָנִי: אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר זְעֵירִי: הַכֹּל מוֹדִים בְּבֶן תֵּשַׁע שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד שֶׁבִּיאָתוֹ בִּיאָה, פָּחוֹת מִבֶּן שְׁמֹנֶה שֶׁאֵין בִּיאָתוֹ בִּיאָה. לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ אֶלָּא בְּבֶן שְׁמֹנֶה, דְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי סָבְרִי: גָּמְרִינַן מִדּוֹרוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנִים, וּבֵית הִלֵּל סָבְרִי: לָא גָּמְרִינַן מִדּוֹרוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנִים.

"Rabbi Ḥiyya, son of Rabba bar Naḥmani, says that Rav Ḥisda says, and some say that Rav Ḥisda says that Ze’eiri says: All, i.e., both Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, concede regarding a boy nine years and one day old that his intercourse is regarded as intercourse, disqualifying a woman from marrying into the priesthood and resulting in her liability for the death penalty, even though he himself is not liable to receive it. They also all agree that a boy less than eight years old is not regarded as having engaged in intercourse with respect to these halakhot. Their disagreement pertains only to a boy who is eight years old, as Beit Shammai maintains that we learn from earlier generations, when people could father children at that age, and we apply that reality to the present; while Beit Hillel contends that we do not learn from earlier generations."

Kiseh

 Maimonides writes in MN 1:9 that the Hebrew word "Kisse" fundamentally translates to "throne." This throne was exclusively occupied by individuals of majesty and authority, such as kings. The throne itself isn't inherently special; it gains significance from the person who occupies it, due to the symbolism they bestow upon it. This is why the Beit Hamikdash is called God's throne, as it symbolizes, through the observer, the God who revealed Himself there (through prophecy-my words)

Maimonides further explains that the same concept applies to the heavens being referred to as God's throne. They reveal the majesty of God to those who study them, illustrating how He governs and controls the world, as evidenced by the benefits we experience on Earth, as a result of the heavens(rain, seasons etc). As stated in Isaiah 66:1: "So says God: The heavens are my throne."

In other words, unlike a human king who must fight to ascend to the throne, thereby making it royal and special through their reign, God is already the King through our observation and understanding of the cause of the world's existence. The throne symbolizes our realization through creation—whether divine or our own—that He is the cause and creator of everything we experience. Objects or creations that awaken this awareness are referred to as God's throne.

On this note, I'd like to highlight an interesting passage in the Book of Esther:

The word "kiseh" (throne) appears only three times in the Megillah. The first instance is when Achashverosh is mentioned as the occupier of the throne-Chapter 1:2:

"בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם כְּשֶׁבֶת הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ עַל כִּסֵּא מַלְכוּתוֹ אֲשֶׁר בְּשׁוּשַׁן הַבִּירָה."

The second instance is when Haman is mentioned as the occupier of the throne- Chapter 3:1:

"אַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה גִּדַּל הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ אֶת הָמָן בֶּן הַמְּדָתָא הָאֲגָגִי וַיְנַשְּׂאֵהוּ וַיָּשֶׂם אֶת כִּסְאוֹ מֵעַל כׇּל הַשָּׂרִים אֲשֶׁר אִתּוֹ."

Finally, in Chapter 5:1:

"וַיְהִי בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי וַתִּלְבַּשׁ אֶסְתֵּר מַלְכוּת וַתַּעֲמֹד בַּחֲצַר בֵּית הַמֶּלֶךְ הַפְּנִימִית נֹכַח בֵּית הַמֶּלֶךְ וְהַמֶּלֶךְ יוֹשֵׁב עַל כִּסֵּא מַלְכוּתוֹ בְּבֵית הַמַּלְכוּת נֹכַח פֶּתַח הַבָּיִת."

In this last mention of the "kiseh," the Megillah is silent about who is occupying  the throne, referring only to the word "melech" (king). I believe this was intentional, to show that Esther was approaching two kings or two thrones at once—the earthly king who makes the throne his own and the divine King known through the realization of His throne.

Note-perhaps this is the reason that the word נכח is written twice-to support this idea

Purim 2025

 The evil Mordechai...!

This year, the part of the Megillah that resonates most profoundly with me is the final pasuk:

כִּי מָרְדֳּכַי הַיְּהוּדִי, מִשְׁנֶה לַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ, וְגָדוֹל לַיְּהוּדִים, וְרָצוּי לְרֹב אֶחָיו--דֹּרֵשׁ טוֹב לְעַמּוֹ, וְדֹבֵר שָׁלוֹם לְכָל-זַרְעוֹ

"For Mordechai the Jew was second in rank to King Ahasuerus, and he was esteemed among the Jews and favored by the majority of his brothers. He sought the welfare of his people and spoke peace to all his descendants."

What truly captivates me is the phrase "favored by the majority of his brothers." Much like the biblical Pinchas, Mordechai’s decisive actions led to the deaths of over seventy thousand fellow citizens. There were no trials, no justice system to condemn them; it was simply the king’s decree that sealed their fate. One can almost hear the progressive voices bemoaning that if only Mordechai had bowed down, this entire saga might have been avoided. I can envision the teshuvot written in condemnation of Mordechai for his refusal to bow, risking the lives of his fellow Jews while turning a blind eye to the ensuing bloodshed.

Imagine the fervent discussions among the frum community and in the chareidi yeshivot about a local Rosh Yeshiva marrying off his niece to a non-Jew! 

Now, picture if social media had existed then—how the self-righteous would argue about the precedent set by the slaughter of fellow citizens and the implications for future violence at the king’s whim. 

The modern-day debates circulating in Jewish social media against Trump and his recent actions regarding the terrorist Mahmoud Khalil likely mirror those once directed at Mordechai in his time. This is precisely why the Megillah emphasizes "the majority of his brothers." It serves as a powerful reminder that this is a recurring theme in Jewish history. We will always question and critique, even in the wake of a hard-won victory over our adversaries. Just as Pinchas, after slaying Zimri, received a blessing of peace to counter the dissenters of his actions, so too does the Megillah conclude with Mordechai and the enduring theme of peace:

דֹבֵר שָׁלוֹם לְכָל-זַרְעוֹ

Happy and peaceful purim to all my Jewish brothers and sisters! :)

A Reflection on Miracles and Belief: Insights from the Rambam and Talmudic Stories(in the daf yomi)

Unlike the followers of Voodoo Judaism and the "magical Torah protection" espoused by the Chareidi Eirav Rav groups in Israel, the Rambam was not a proponent of miracles. In fact, in his Yesodei Hatorah(Chapter 8), he states:

מֹשֶׁה רַבֵּנוּ--לֹא הֶאֱמִינוּ בּוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל, מִפְּנֵי הָאוֹתוֹת שֶׁעָשָׂה:  שֶׁהַמַּאֲמִין עַל פִּי הָאוֹתוֹת--יֵשׁ בְּלִבּוֹ דֹּפִי, שֶׁאִפְשָׁר שֶׁיֵּעָשֶׂה הָאוֹת בְּלָאט וְכִשּׁוּף.

"Moses our teacher – Israel did not believe in him because of the signs he performed: for the one who believes based on signs has a flaw in their heart, as it is possible for a sign to be done secretly and through sorcery."

This perspective aligns beautifully with the upcoming Daf Yomi (Sanhedrin 96b) discussion this Sunday, which recounts the story of Nebuzaradan, the Babylonian general who destroyed Jerusalem and the First Temple. The Gemara shares the following narrative:

---

"When he reached the Sanctuary, he saw the blood of Zechariah the priest boiling. It had not calmed since he was killed in the Temple (see II Chronicles 24:20–22). Nebuzaradan asked the priests: "What is this?" They replied: "It is the blood of offerings that was spilled." Nebuzaradan said: "Bring animals, and I will test to determine if the blood of the animals is similar to the boiling blood." He slaughtered the animals, but their blood was not similar to the boiling blood. He then demanded: "Reveal the source of that blood to me; if not, I will comb your flesh with an iron comb."

The priests explained: "This blood belongs to a priest and a prophet who prophesied to Israel about the destruction of Jerusalem and whom they killed." Nebuzaradan said: "I will pacify the blood so the boiling will stop." He brought the Sages and killed them over the blood, yet the boiling did not cease. He brought schoolchildren and killed them, and still, the boiling continued. He brought young priests and killed them, but the boiling persisted. He continued this gruesome act until he had killed 940,000 people over the blood, and still, the boiling did not cease.

Nebuzaradan approached the blood and said: "Zechariah, Zechariah, the worthy among them I killed on your behalf. Is it satisfactory for you that I kill them all?" Immediately, the boiling ceased. Nebuzaradan contemplated repentance, realizing that if those who caused only one person's death required such extensive atonement, then what would be required of him for all the destruction he had caused? He deserted his army, sent a last will to his house, and converted."

---

What is fascinating about this aggadah is that it was not the miraculous boiling of blood that convinced Nebuzaradan to convert, but rather his rational contemplation of teshuva (repentance) for all the death and destruction for which he was responsible.

The Gemara continues with the following teaching:

---

"The Sages taught in a baraita: Naaman the Aramean was a ger toshav, meaning he accepted upon himself to refrain from idol worship but did not convert to Judaism. Conversely, Nebuzaradan was a completely righteous convert."

---

In this context, Nebuzaradan is compared to Naaman the Aramean, who, after being miraculously cured of leprosy through the prophet Elisha, recognized that the God of Elisha was the true God. However, he did not convert fully.

The messages conveyed in these stories resonate deeply with the Rambam's teachings in Yesodei Hatorah. Miracles alone do not foster true belief in God; rather, it is the arduous process of rational thinking and introspection that leads one to genuinely embrace faith in the God of our ancestors.

Rachel crying over her children

 This Week's Parsha Insight: The Legacy of Rachel

In this week's parsha, we reflect on the poignant moment of Rachel's death while giving birth to Binyamin on the way to Efrat (Beth Lechem). This narrative resonates deeply, especially in light of the powerful verse from Jeremiah 31:15:

"כֹּ֣ה ׀ אָמַ֣ר יְהֹוָ֗ה ק֣וֹל בְּרָמָ֤ה נִשְׁמָע֙ נְהִי֙ בְּכִ֣י תַמְרוּרִ֔ים רָחֵ֖ל מְבַכָּ֣ה עַל־בָּנֶ֑יהָ מֵאֲנָ֛ה לְהִנָּחֵ֥ם עַל־בָּנֶ֖יהָ כִּ֥י אֵינֶֽנּוּ׃ {ס}”

“Thus said God: A cry is heard in Ramah—Wailing, bitter weeping—Rachel weeping for her children. She refuses to be comforted, for her children, who are gone.”

This verse has gained immense popularity, particularly as a song sung at the Kotel on Tisha B'Av and during gatherings aimed at unification(However, I find the Tisha B'Av trend somewhat problematic from a halachic perspective).

Rachel's story symbolizes the complex relationship between her descendants and those of Judah. Throughout Jewish history, Rachel and her children have often been associated with division rather than unity. From the selling of Joseph to the strife during the monarchy between Saul and David, and even the breakaway of the ten tribes from Judah, Rachel's legacy is far from one of harmony.

Interestingly, Rashi cites a midrash where Rachel defends the Jewish nation by highlighting her self-sacrifice, allowing Leah to marry Jacob first. This interpretation may serve to address the very tensions I’ve mentioned.

Moreover, I want to offer a deeper perspective on Jeremiah's pasuk. At the time of Jeremiah's , the Jewish experience in Israel is coming to an end. The ten tribes are in exile, and the kingdom of Judah is on the brink of collapse. In this chapter, Jeremiah reminisces about happier times at the dawn of the nation's birth:

"כֹּ֚ה אָמַ֣ר יְהֹוָ֔ה מָצָ֥א חֵן֙ בַּמִּדְבָּ֔ר עַ֖ם שְׂרִ֣ידֵי חָ֑רֶב הָל֥וֹךְ לְהַרְגִּיע֖וֹ יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃"

“Thus said God: The people escaped from the sword, Found favor in the wilderness; When Israel was marching homeward.”

In this moment, Jeremiah remembers the tribes responsible for bringing the Jewish people into Israel—Joshua and his legacy. It is over this failed mission that Rachel weeps for her children. They played a significant role in both the entry into the land and its subsequent failures, embodying the sorrow of a mission that never fully came to fruition—much like Rachel never returning to her husband's homeland.

Yet, Jeremiah ultimately consoles Rachel with words of hope:

"כֹּ֣ה ׀ אָמַ֣ר יְהֹוָ֗ה מִנְעִ֤י קוֹלֵךְ֙ מִבֶּ֔כִי וְעֵינַ֖יִךְ מִדִּמְעָ֑ה כִּי֩ יֵ֨שׁ שָׂכָ֤ر לִפְעֻלָּתֵךְ֙ נְאֻם־יְהֹוָ֔ה וְשָׁ֖בוּ מֵאֶ֥רֶץ אוֹיֵֽב׃”

“Thus said God: Restrain your voice from weeping, Your eyes from shedding tears; For there is a reward for your labor—declares God: They shall return from the enemy’s land.”

This reassures us that the mission is not a complete failure; success is historically just around the corner. Perhaps this is where the idea of the Messiah of Joseph coming before the Messiah of David originates...

The first chapter of the moreh

 A flash of bright light this past shabbat with an understanding of a difficult piece in the Moreh Nevuchim. 

For over twenty-five years, I have been studying the Moreh Nevuchim of the Rambam, but the first chapter eluded me, specifically the meaning of "Tzelem" and "demuseinu" in relation to the pasuk in Genesis that compares Man to God.

However, during this past Shabbat, it was as if lightning struck the entire room, allowing me to finally grasp the Rambam's meaning in a way that I have not seen discussed before. I will present the pasuk and my explanation of the Rambam which will pasted at the end of this post.

א,כו וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים, נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ; וְיִרְדּוּ בִדְגַת הַיָּם וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם, וּבַבְּהֵמָה וּבְכָל-הָאָרֶץ, וּבְכָל-הָרֶמֶשׂ, הָרֹמֵשׂ עַל-הָאָרֶץ.

"And God said: 'Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."

The obvious difficulty with this pasuk is the comparison of man to God using the words "image" and "likeness". The Rambam explains that the corporeality of God is impossible as that would contradict the true unity of God(which he will discuss throughout the Moreh). If that's the case, then how do we explain the torah using physical terms to compare God to man?

The way I understand the Rambams explanation, is  that the term "tzelem" defines the natural form that gives reality to a thing. For example idols are called tzelemim, not because of the shape or figure of the idol but because of what the idol represents. People don't believe that the idol has power but instead the force or god that the idol represents is what they are beseeching  or praying to. This would then separate the idol from say statue of George Washington on a horse. 

When describing the creation of man, the word "tzelem" is used because of what makes us really who we are and at the same time, this characteristic  makes us different than all other creation. The ability to think abstractly or rationally is what makes us unique from all other living creatures.

 This uniqueness is why we were created on a separate day. In the same way that this ability makes us completely different than all of creation, God too  is different than and cant be compared to anything of creation. In other words, the concept that we can't be compared to anything else in creation because of our rational thinking, so too, God cannot be compared to his creation. That's why the words נעשה אדם בצלמנו 

(Let us make man in our image) is used. Both God and man are unique in creation and cannot be compared to anything in creation because of our attributes of what defines man and what defines God.

The next description in the pasuk continues this theme with one additional step. Just like rational thinking has no physical characteristics, as it is not something that can be touched, felt or linked to any appendages of the human body; so too with describing God, there is nothing physical than can be attributed to God. That is the meaning of כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ(after our likeness). Both man's rational thinking and God have no physical attributes. 

In essence, the Rambam is teaching us a beautiful chiddush on this pasuk that seemingly describes the creation of "man". The pasuk in reality, is not actually describing man but instead describing the torahs definition of God.

Isn't it then very apropos that the Rambam in beginning his philosophical book that discusses judaism's understanding of God, that he begin his discussion with these very first pasukim that discusses the creation of man and in reality, the definition of God.

One last idea when we pray three times daily and say in the third beracha of the amidah

אַתָּה קָדוֹש וְשִׁמְךָ קָדוֹש, וּקְדוֹשִׁים בְּכָל יוֹם יְהַלְלוּךָ סֶּלָה

You are holy(separate from anything that exists), your name is holy (separate from anything that exists) and the holy ones(the jewish people/man) praise you daily. In this blessing both God and Man/Jewish people are holy/separate because of our uniqueness from the creation 

מורה נבוכים א:א

׳צלם׳ ו׳דמות׳. כבר חשבו בני אדם כי ׳צלם׳ בלשון העברי יורה על תמונת הדבר ותארו; והביא זה אל הגשמה גמורה לאומרו ״נעשה אדם בצלמנו כדמותנו״ – וחשבו שהאלוה על צורת אדם – רצוני לומר: תמונתו ותארו – והתחיבה להם ההגשמה הגמורה והאמינו בה; וראו שהם אם יפרדו מזאת האמונה יכזיבו הכתוב וגם ישימו האלוה נעדר אם לא יהיה גוף בעל פנים ויד כמותם בתמונה ובתואר אלא שהוא יותר גדול ויותר בהיר לפי סברתם והחומר שלו גם כן אינו דם ובשר – זה תכלית מה שחשבוהו רוממות בחק האלוה.

אמנם מה שצריך שיאמר בהרחקת הגשמות והעמיד האחדות האמיתית – אשר אין אמת לה אלא בהסרת הגשמות – הנה תדע המופת על כל זה המאמר אבל הערתנו הנה בזה הפרק היא – לבאר ענין ׳צלם׳ ו׳דמות׳.

ואומר כי הצורה המפורסמת אצל ההמון – אשר היא תמונת הדבר ותארו – שמה המיוחד בה בלשון העברי ׳תאר׳ – אמר ״יפה תואר ויפה מראה״, ״מה תארו?״, ״כתואר בני המלך״ ונאמר בצורה המלאכית ״יתארהו בשרד... ובמחוגה יתארהו״ – וזהו שם שלא יפול על האלוה ית׳ כלל – חלילה וחס.

אמנם ׳צלם׳ הוא נופל על הצורה הטבעית – רצוני לומר: על הענין אשר בו נתעצם הדבר והיה מה שהוא והוא אמיתתו מאשר הוא הנמצא ההוא – אשר הענין ההוא באדם הוא – אשר בעבורו תהיה ההשגה האנושית. ומפני ההשגה הזאת השכלית נאמר בו ״בצלם אלהים ברא אותו״

ולכן נאמר: ״צלמם תבזה״ – כי ה׳בזיון׳ דבק בנפש אשר היא הצורה המינית לא בתמונת האברים ותארם. – וכן אומר כי הסיבה בקריאת הצלמים ׳צלמים׳ – היות המבוקש מהם ענינם הנחשב, לא תמונתם ותארם; וכן אומר ב״צלמי טחוריהם״ כי היה הנרצה מהם – ענין דחות הזק ה׳טחורים׳ לא תואר ה׳טחורים׳. ואם אי אפשר מבלתי היות ׳צלמי טחוריהם׳ ו׳צלמים׳ נקראים כן מפני התמונה והתואר יהיה, אם כן, ׳צלם׳ – שם משתתף או מסופק יאמר על הצורה המינית ועל הצורה המלאכית ועל כיוצא בה מתמונות הגשמים הטבעיים ותאריהם.

ויהיה הנרצה באמרו: ׳נעשה אדם בצלמנו׳ – הצורה המינית אשר היא ההשגה השכלית לא התמונה והתואר. הנה כבר בארנו לך ההפרש בין ׳צלם׳ ו׳תואר׳ ובארנו ענין ׳צלם׳.

אמנם ׳דמות׳ הוא שם מן ׳דמה׳ והוא כן דמיון בענין כאמרו: ״דמיתי לקאת מדבר״ – לא שדמה לכנפיה ונוצתה אבל דמה אבלו לאבלה; וכן: ״כל עץ בגן אלהים לא דמה אליו ביופיו״ – דמיון בענין היופי; ״חמת למו כדמות חמת נחש״, ״דמיונו כאריה יכסוף לטרוף״ – כלם דמיון בענין לא בתמונה ובתואר. וכן נאמר: ״דמות כסא״, ״דמות הכסא״ – דמיון בענין ההתנשאות והרוממות לא בריבועו ועביו ואריכות רגליו כמו שיחשבו העניים; וכן: ״דמות החיות״

וכאשר יוחד האדם בענין שהוא זר בו מאוד מה שאין כן בדבר מן הנמצאות מתחת גלגל הירח – והוא ההשגה השכלית – אשר לא ישתמש בה חוש ולא מעשה גוף ולא יד ולא רגל – דימה אותה בהשגת האלוה אשר אינה בכלי (ואם אינו דמיון באמת אבל לנראה מן הדעת תחלה). ונאמר באדם מפני זה הענין – רצוני לומר: מפני השכל האלהי המדובק בו – שהוא ב׳צלם אלהים ובדמותו׳ – לא שהאלוה ית׳ גוף שיהיה בעל תמונה.

.

Why no holiday for entering the land

 Leaving the pagan culture behind(shlissel challah). A lesson from this weeks parsha.

Why is there no major holiday for celebrating the entering the land of Israel?

None of our holidays are a celebration of the jews entering the land of Israel. Isn't a major part of our religion based on the fulfillment of God's promise to Avraham that his descendants will inherit the land of Israel? Yet, no celebration when the promise becomes a reality. No celebration/holiday even the second time we entered the land with Nehemiah...?

We have three holidays that are connected to the different seasons and major historical events of the Jewish people 

Pesach- ripening of the wheat. The redemption from Egypt/slavery

Sukkot-gathering of the wheat into the house. Dwelling in huts in the desert or remembering the cloud that protected us.

Shavuot-harvesting of wheat. The rabbinical connection to the giving of the torah

None of these involve the entering or conquering the land of Israel!

It's interesting to note that the founder of our religion, Abraham, is first introduced to us via a command from God, to go into exile.  He is told to leave his family and culture and become a nomad. Rav Soloveitchik describes the jewish nation as an extension of Abraham. Just like Abraham discovered God in exile and spread the philosophy of monotheism,so too  his descendants would do the same. 

It is when we are in exile that the jewish people have truly flourished.

 Any reader of tnach will realize that the short time that the Jewish people were rulers in their own land, was in fact, when they were at their lowest spiritual and cultural point. Just think of pilegesh b'givah, the worshiping of idols, the break away of the ten tribes from Judah, the evil kings and the list goes on. The jewish history in the land of Israel was very far from glorious or anything we as a nation, should be proud of.

It is in fact, in the desert, that the jews flourished religiously and received the Torah(The travelling mishkan represents God being found in the desert.) It was during the beginning of the destruction of our second temple and at the beginning of our current exile, that the mishna and talmud was organized and written down. Post destruction, the greatest thinkers from the geonim to the rishonim, contributed to the treasure of torah and jewish philosophy, that we possess today. Never in history, have so many jews studied and practiced the torah, like in our current exile.

R' Meir Simcha Hakohen discusses in his classic work, Meshech Chochma, how  the jews need to travel in exile, in order for innovation in jewish thought to take place.  When the jews spend too much time in one place, our torah innovation becomes stagnant.  That's why God constantly keeps us on the move in exile and chases us from one country to the next.  It is during these tumultuous times that out greatest religious creativity takes place. The different cultures that we are exposed to, open us up to different ways of thinking and even looking at ourselves. Of course the influence is not always positive, as we can see the influence of paganism in our thinking and practices, even till this day(such as tehillim mantras and this weeks shlissel challah).

It's also interesting to note how the greatest leaders/prophets of the jewish people always found God in the desert/wilderness/exile.  From Abraham, Jacob(who represents the jewish people in exile),Moses, David etc. (I always wondered if chazal created the story of King Solomon going into exile,with his fight with the king of demons; as an allegory that would sync with the greatest leaders and prophets who also became great in exile)

Tying this all together to this weeks parsha, where it discusses the process of the high priest/Aaron entering the holy of holies. There is a major preparation of purification and sacrifices that allow Aaron to enter the holiest place of the Jewish people.  As a representative and extension of the Jewish people, this process is involved in complete forgiveness for the sins of the nation.  It is during this spiritual climax, that the strange service of sending a goat into exile takes place. The Rabbis have had a real challenge explaining what really  seems like a pagan ritual. Perhaps this ritual is placed at this climatic moment of service by entering the holy of holies, to remind us that it's not necessarily where we think that God is found, that we truly find him. It is actually in the desert, which represents the exile of our culture and ideas, that both creativity and a connection to God can really begin to take place

Have a great shlissel free shabbat! :)