English translation — ויגש ב

Talk b<pg>198</pg>

A.

We learn in tractate Ta'anit¹

: "Do not be agitated on the road²,

Said Rabbi Elazar³

Joseph said to his brothers: Do not engage in halachic discussion, lest the road agitate you."

But in Bereishit Rabbah on the verse⁴

it is stated: "Do not stop yourselves from words of Torah."

And the commentators wrote⁵,

that there is no dispute here between the Talmud and the Midrash regarding the essence of the matter

(whether there is an obligation of engaging in Torah on the way)

— according to what is explained in the continuation of the discussion there: "Is that so? But didn't Rabbi Elai bar Berekhya say: Two Torah scholars who are walking on the road and there are no words of Torah between them are worthy of being burned, etc.? It is not difficult: this is for reviewing, that is for in-depth study."

And Rashi explained: "For reviewing, it is necessary on the road, but for a matter that requires in-depth study, no."

(so that he will not stray on the road)

; and this is that according to the Talmud — Joseph's intention was that they should refrain from in-depth study of halacha on the road,

and according to the Midrash his intention was that they should not refrain from study for review.

[And this is⁶

Also the precise language of the Midrash "Do not stand yourselves away from words of Torah" — and not like the language of the Talmud "

(Do not occupy yourselves)

with a matter of halacha": In the Gemara the intention is to learn with in-depth study,

therefore it stated "a matter of halacha"⁷

that in this is the main in-depth study of Torah

(And this is also the precise language "Do not occupy yourselves with a matter of halacha",

for the term "occupation" indicates in-depth study and pilpul⁸)

; but in the Midrash it stated "words of Torah" simply,

which includes everything,

not specifically in-depth study of halacha,

and Joseph warned them that they should not become idle from words of Torah

(simply)

— and on the contrary, words of Torah simply — that is, speech in Torah and nothing more,

that is, by rote recitation

(And "Do not be angry on the way" is that if "there are no words of Torah between them they are worthy of being burned",

as the continuation of the Gemara)].

And it is found,

that in the essence of the matter there is no dispute here

(For rote recitation is needed on the road,

and in-depth study — not),

but according to the sugya of the Talmud Joseph warned them not to engage in in-depth study of a matter of halacha,

and according to the Midrash he warned them that they should learn

(by rote recitation).

And it requires explanation: what is the reasoning of the dispute in interpreting the content of Joseph's words to his brothers.

2.

And it seems to say that they disagree regarding the definition of the obligation to study Torah on the way,

which can be explained in two ways:

A)

This obligation is part of the constant obligation of Torah study in every place and in every situation in which a person finds himself,

and it is a full verse that the scripture stated⁹

"<pg>199</pg>

And you shall speak of them when you sit in your house and when you walk on the road and when you lie down and when you rise up,"

behold it is explicit that also "when you walk on the road" one is obligated in Torah study.

And in the language of the Alter Rebbe in his Hilchos Talmud Torah¹⁰

: "One is obligated to engage in Torah at every time that it is possible for him, and even when he walks on the road, as it is written 'and when you walk on the road,' and if one walks alone and turns his mind to idleness, he endangers his life.

And two who walk on the road and there are no words of Torah between them, they are worthy of being burned in fire."

2)

This obligation is a special obligation that applies to one who travels on the road, and it is part of the laws of "traveling on the road".

And perhaps there is room to add,

that since it is forbidden to place oneself in a place of danger

(and all roads are presumed to be dangerous&lt;sup&gt;11&lt;/sup&gt;),

therefore a person is obligated to arrange his travel on the road in a manner that will be protected as much as possible,

and therefore he is obligated to engage in Torah on the road,

because the Torah protects and saves&lt;sup&gt;12&lt;/sup&gt;.

And the practical difference in actuality,

when one travels on the road for his livelihood matters and is occupied and busy with this,

that from the perspective of the laws of Torah study "it is permitted to him from the Torah..

to engage in his business affairs which are needs of his livelihood and commerce"&lt;sup&gt;13&lt;/sup&gt;,

but from the perspective of the laws of "traveling on the road" he must engage in Torah so that the study will protect him

(similar to the obligation of the traveler's prayer).

And one could say,

that these two modes we also find in the words of the poskim:

The Magen Avraham wrote in the laws of prayer¹⁴

(regarding the laws of the Traveler's Prayer)

: "And he should engage in Torah on the road but he should not delve into halacha lest he come to be distracted, and perhaps when sitting in a wagon and another person drives the horses, even delving is permitted."

And it implies somewhat that

(also)

the detail of "he should engage in Torah on the road"

(is not merely an introduction to the prohibition of delving into halacha lest he come to be distracted,

but rather)

it is a detail and law regarding traveling on the road,

and therefore they wrote it in the continuation of the laws of the Traveler's Prayer.

But in Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe&lt;sup&gt;15&lt;/sup&gt;,

when he copied this law from the Magen Avraham,

he wrote "And when he is on the road he should occupy himself with Torah

(as it is said 'and when you walk on the road')

and he should not occupy himself with in-depth study of halacha lest he stray on the road unless he is sitting in a wagon and another person is driving the horses",

behold even though he brought it in the laws of the prayer for the road he adds

(in parentheses)

the source of the matter in the verse "as it is said 'and when you walk on the road'",

and it can be said that he holds that this law is from the general obligation of "and when you walk on the road".

And behold the Shelah wrote&lt;sup&gt;16&lt;/sup&gt;

— and it was brought as halacha in the Eliyah Rabbah&lt;sup&gt;17&lt;/sup&gt;

— "A great obligation is upon the one who walks on the road that he occupy himself with Torah, as the Mishnah teaches&lt;sup&gt;18&lt;/sup&gt;

One who walks on the road..

and says 'How beautiful is this tree' etc. and we also read in Sotah page 49&lt;sup&gt;19&lt;/sup&gt;

and in Taanit the first chapter&lt;sup&gt;*19&lt;/sup&gt;

etc. 'Two Torah scholars who walk on the road and there are no words of Torah between them are worthy of being burned' etc. 'if there is no speech they are worthy of being burned' therefore he should not cease from meditating on words of Torah to fulfill what is said&lt;sup&gt;20&lt;/sup&gt;

'When you walk it will guide you' and he should learn by heart what he can or occupy himself with some psalms or discourses to explain them etc.",

And from the length of his language it implies that this is not

(only)

from the obligation of Torah study "when you walk on the road" but that this is a law concerning walking on the road,

therefore he did not bring the verse "and when you walk on the road" but rather "when you walk it will guide you"&lt;sup&gt;21&lt;/sup&gt;.

&lt;pg&gt;200&lt;/pg&gt;

And the Alter Rebbe did not bring the words of the Shelah,

and also did not bring "to fulfill what is said 'when you walk it will lead you',"

but he infers "that it is said 'and when you walk on the way'"

(which was not brought in the Magen Avraham),

it is proven more apparently as above,

that according to his approach the obligation of Torah study on the way is

(only)

from the aspect of the general obligation of Torah study

(also)

on the way²²

(and as is explained in Hilchos Talmud Torah there)²³.

3.

And this is the distinction between the Talmud and the Midrash in the interpretation of our verses:

According to the Talmud that Yosef said to them

(only)

"Do not engage in matters of halacha",

that they should not engage in a matter that requires deep analysis,

this is because according to the Talmud's view, learning for review on the road is only due to the general obligation²⁴

and the constant [engagement] in Torah study also "when you walk on the road"²⁵,

and it is not plausible that Yosef warned them about this obligation,

because simply understood, Yosef's words were only about the journey on the road and its conduct

(just as he did not warn them to fulfill other commandments while on the road)

;

But the midrash that explained that Yosef said to them "Do not stop yourselves from words of Torah",

is because it holds that the study of Torah on the road is

(also)

a detail in the laws of traveling on the road,

that when traveling on the road one needs to merit the Torah that protects and saves²⁶.

<pg>201</pg>

4.

And behold, all this is according to the version of the Midrash as it is in Bereishit Rabbah before us.

But in Tosafot in Taanit there they brought on "Do not be agitated on the way" — "and there is a Midrash: Do not interrupt from a matter of halachah",

according to this version,

the Midrash disagrees with the words of the Talmud&lt;sup&gt;27&lt;/sup&gt;,

for according to the conclusion of the Talmud one should not engage in a matter of halachah that requires in-depth study,

but according to the Midrash one must engage "in a matter of halachah",

that is, also for in-depth study.

And as several commentators wrote&lt;sup&gt;28&lt;/sup&gt;,

that this is the novelty in the language of the Midrash that the Tosafot brought "Do not interrupt from a matter of halachah",

relative to the language "Do not stand yourselves away from words of Torah"

(as in Bereishit Rabbah before us),

for according to the opinion

(and version)

of the Tosafot, the Midrash holds that even a matter of halachah that is "for in-depth study"&lt;sup&gt;29&lt;/sup&gt;,

"Do not interrupt"&lt;sup&gt;30&lt;/sup&gt;.

And according to what we have learned, that there are two ways in the explanation of the obligation of study on the way,

there is room for analysis according to the method of the Midrash in Tosafot,

whether the obligation of "Do not interrupt from a matter of halachah" is from the aspect of the laws of traveling on the way or from the aspect of the law of Torah study.

At first glance it is logical to say that it is from the aspect of the law of Torah study,

for there is no reason at all that there should be a special obligation in study of in-depth analysis on the way.

And so it is somewhat implied from the wording of the Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe there, "And when he is on the road he should engage in Torah

(as it is said, 'and when you walk on the road')

and he should not engage in in-depth analysis of halacha lest he stray from the road, unless he is sitting in a wagon and another person is driving the horses,"

that from the fact that the Alter Rebbe wrote them in one continuum,

"And when he is on the road he should engage in Torah etc. and he should not engage in in-depth analysis etc. unless he is sitting in a wagon etc."

(and not as in the Magen Avraham who wrote them as a separate clause,

"And it is possible that when sitting in a wagon and another person is driving the horses, even in-depth analysis is permitted")

it implies that this is not only a permission alone,

but rather — an obligation,

that he is obligated to engage in Torah with in-depth analysis,

and that is that the general obligation of Torah study

("And you shall speak of them etc. and when you walk on the road")

obligates that also on the road he must learn with in-depth analysis

(according to his ability).

That is: the general obligation of Torah study includes not only the duty of learning at all times,

but that the quality of learning should be in-depth as much as possible, as

the capacity of his intellect³¹,

and as hinted at the beginning of the verse "and you shall teach them to your children" which our Sages of blessed memory interpreted³²

that words of Torah must be "sharp in

(within)

your mouth".

that also this obligation of "and you shall teach them to your children" is at all times

("when you sit in your house and when you walk on the way"),

but in the usual manner it is impossible to learn in-depth while walking on the way, and an unavoidable circumstance the Merciful One exempts,

but if "he sits in a wagon and another person drives the horses" the obligation to learn in-depth applies to him.

And this is also the intent of the midrash

(according to the version of the Tosafos)

that Joseph warned his brothers "Do not stop from words of halacha,"

that he did not come to warn them that they should learn Torah on the way

(simply,

according to the version),

but rather to warn them that they should not stop from the study of Torah in depth

(which they engaged in while at home³³)

even while they were on the way

(as is evident from the wording "Do not stop").

[And according to the sharpening, one may add,

that Joseph's words "Do not be agitated on the way" — "Do not stop from words of halacha,"

came in continuation of what was said previously³⁴,

"And you commanded this do: take for yourselves from the land of Egypt wagons for your little ones and for your wives etc. And Joseph gave them wagons according to Pharaoh's command etc.,"

and it is reasonable that he sent wagons in an orderly manner,

namely with drivers of the wagons,

servants to drive the wagons

(and also the donkeys and the abundance of gifts that he sent with them),

and therefore he warned them "Do not stop from words of halacha,"

for they can engage in the in-depth study of halacha without straying on the way,

as per the aforementioned law

(in the Magen Avraham and Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe)

that one sits in a wagon and another person drives the horses

(and based on this,

this law has a source in the words of the midrash that is brought in the Tosafos)].

5.

But this interpretation in the words of the Midrash

(according to the version of the Tosafot)

is forced,

for it is difficult to say that Yosef's intention was only to inform them that the obligation of Torah study

(including in-depth study)

applies also while they are on the road.

And furthermore: simply, it is reasonable to say,

that Yosef warned them about a particular matter that pertains only to "the road"

(as above).

And therefore it appears to explain that also according to this Midrash,

Yosef's intention was to warn them about studying a matter of halacha on the road for the sake of the road: protection etc.³⁵.

[And this is the intention of the Tosafot in bringing the words of the Midrash,

that according to the approach of the Talmud the obligation to learn on the way is from the laws of Torah study as above,

and therefore it must be said that Joseph's warning regarding the way was only the negative,

that they should not learn on the way in matters of in-depth study "lest the way become burdensome upon you"

(whether it is good advice that it informs us,

or that this is a law in walking on the way,

that from the aspect of the prohibition to place oneself in a place of danger it is forbidden to learn for in-depth study on the way&lt;sup&gt;36&lt;/sup&gt;)

— but not so according to the approach of the Midrash,

that there is a special obligation to learn Torah on the way,

because of the protection on the way as above],

And the difference between the approach of Bereishit Rabbah&lt;pg&gt;203&lt;/pg&gt;

(that is before us)

[that the obligation to learn Torah on the way is only for girsa

("Do not stand yourselves away from words of Torah" — simply)],

and the method of the midrash according to the version of the Tosafot

[that "Do not interrupt from a matter of halacha",

that they should learn also for iyun]

— it can be said,

that it depends on the essence of the defense and protection that is through Torah,

which is to be explained in two ways:

A)

This is a segulah connected with the mitzvah of Talmud Torah,

that the merit of the act of this mitzvah is great,

until it protects the person³⁷.

And in the manner of what the Rambam wrote³⁸

that one who reads "verses and a psalm from Tehillim" behold "the merit of their reading" protects him and he is saved "from troubles and damages".

b)

The study effects a change in the person who engages in Torah,

for when he is preoccupied and engaged in Torah study,

a change of the person occurs through the Torah becoming united with him

(in the language of our master the Alter Rebbe³⁹,

that there is made a "wondrous unity..

to ones who are truly unified and singular from every side and angle" of the human intellect and of the wisdom of the Torah),

and consequently he is protected and guarded from anything harmful

(like the Torah)⁴⁰.

And along the lines of the statement of our Sages of blessed memory⁴¹

"The fire of Gehinnom does not rule over Torah scholars..

for their entire body is fire, as it is written⁴²

Behold, are not My words like fire, says the L-rd."

And the practical difference between these two manners: according to the first manner, study of Torah for rote review suffices,

and even mere reading of verses,

as per the language of the aforementioned Rambam "that he read verses and a psalm from Tehillim",

for he fulfills the commandment of Torah study; but unlike the second manner, this is only when the person studies in depth,

for only when "he studies it well with the depth of his intellect"³⁹,

does the human intellect become united with the wisdom of the Torah and a change of the person occurs etc.⁴³.

And this is the difference between the method of Bereishis Rabbah and the method of the Midrash according to the version of the Tosafos,

for according to Bereishis Rabbah, Yosef warned them that they should learn Torah so that the mitzvah of Torah study would protect them,

and for this, learning for the sake of review is sufficient; but according to the Midrash according to the version of the Tosafos, he warned them about learning for the sake of in-depth study,

so that the protection would be in the second manner mentioned above.

6.

And it can be said,

that this matter

(the protection through in-depth study of Torah from the aspect of a change in the person)

is also hinted at in the precise language of the Midrash

(in the Tosafos)

"Do not stop from words of halachah."

For ostensibly, the language "&lt;pg&gt;204&lt;/pg&gt;

"Do not interrupt" is appropriate regarding prayer and the like,

that one interrupts in the middle of prayer,

but regarding Torah study the phrase "Do not be idle from a matter of halachah" is more appropriate

(as the usual expression "idleness from Torah").

And furthermore: It was stated numerous times in the precise language of Chazal⁴⁴

"One sets aside Torah study and comes to hear the reading of the Megillah",

that the reading of the Megillah is called setting aside from words of Torah,

even though the reading of the Megillah is also Torah study,

the reading of verses of Torah⁴⁵,

because⁴⁶

that reading without analysis in depth is, relative to words of Torah studied with analysis and depth, in the category of idleness from Torah

("One sets aside Torah study").

And if so,

in the phrase "Do not be idle from a matter of halachah" is included also the warning that they should not suffice with learning for rote but should engage in analysis

(a matter of halachah)

specifically

(as above that this is the intent of the midrash)

— and why did the midrash use the expression "Do not interrupt etc." specifically?

And according to the above, it can be said,

that in this the midrash hints to the content of the protection that is through the study of Torah,

that when a person studies with depth and profundity he becomes one thing with the Torah,

without an interruption between them,

and consequently the Torah protects him; and this is what Yosef said "Do not interrupt

(yourselves)

from a matter of halacha",

that there should not be an interruption between you and a matter of halacha,

that they should be entirely one as above.

7.

And it is necessary to explain the reason of the midrash that the tribes needed this protection that is through the study of Torah — that this is because the path in which they went then was most dangerous and therefore they were in need of protection and extra guarding.

And just as in the simple literal way,

there are several levels in the danger of the roads

(even though all roads are presumed dangerous),

and the more dangerous the road is, the more superior protection is needed,

so it is regarding spiritual danger.

And this is the difference between the travel of the tribes several times from the land of Canaan to Egypt back and forth,

and their travel in our verse.

That their previous travels were on the mission of Yaakov to bring grain in the years of famine⁴⁷,

but this travel⁴⁸

"Hurry and go up to my father etc. come down to me, do not stand etc.",

was connected with the descent of Yaakov and all the souls of his household to Egypt,

that is, the descent into exile,

to fulfill what is said in the Covenant Between the Parts⁴⁹

"Your seed shall be a stranger in a land not theirs, and they shall enslave them and oppress them",

and therefore this road specifically needs extra protection and defense.

And this is that Yosef warned them "Do not stop from words of halacha",

that the protection on the "way" that leads to exile is by that there should not be an interruption for them in the study of Torah,

for when Bnei Yisrael engage in Torah with depth,

that they become unified with the Torah,

in their power to overcome the darkness of exile and the exile does not rule at all over a Jewish person,

and as our Rabbis of blessed memory said⁵⁰

"There is no free person except one who engages in Torah study"⁵¹.

And this is also what we find,

that before Yaakov's descent to Egypt, behold "And Yehudah he sent<pg>205</pg>

before him etc. to instruct before him in Goshen"&lt;sup&gt;52&lt;/sup&gt;,

And our Sages, of blessed memory, said&lt;sup&gt;53&lt;/sup&gt;

"to prepare for him a house of study where there would be a teacher of Torah, so that the tribes would be engaged in Torah" — not only that there would be study among the tribes&lt;sup&gt;54&lt;/sup&gt;

of the Torah,

but that there would be a "house of study",

a place of in-depth analysis,

"so that the tribes would be engaged in Torah",

which indicates specifically exertion,

for only through in-depth analysis and exertion in Torah,

the exile cannot rule over the children of Israel.

And based on this, the reason is also understood,

that from the conditions of the King Messiah is,

that he will be "engaged in Torah"&lt;sup&gt;55&lt;/sup&gt;

(even though ostensibly his main matter is being king,

"the King Messiah")

— because the power to redeem Israel from exile is in exertion in Torah,

"engaged in Torah",

that his entire existence is from the existence of the Torah,

which preceded the world&lt;sup&gt;56&lt;/sup&gt;,

and consequently it is above the limitations and boundaries and borders of the exile,

and therefore he "will compel all of Israel to walk in it and strengthen its breach" and will build the Temple in its place and gather the dispersed of Israel&lt;sup&gt;55&lt;/sup&gt;,

in the true and complete redemption.

(From sichos of Shabbos Parshas Va'eira 5741,

Shabbos Parshas Korach 5744)