By Rabbi Pinchas Winston
G-d told Moshe, "Speak to the Children of Israel, and tell them about when
a man's wife deceives him, and another man lies with her carnally and
defiles her, out of sight of her husband and closed off somewhere, and no
witnesses against her can be found. He must bring his wife to the priest."
This is the law of the Sotah, the suspected adulteress, and the parshah
then goes on to detail the procedure for determining her innocence, or
guilt. Without the existence of a Temple, the procedure cannot be carried
out, but that does not mean that its laws cannot elucidate other laws that
apply even during non-Temple times, as the Talmud indicates:
These are the ones (married women) who go out (are divorced) without a
kesuva. Those who break laws which are Da'as Moshe or Yehudis. What is an
example of Da'as Yehudis? A woman who goes outside with uncovered hair.
Wait! [The prohibition against] uncovered hair is from the Torah, as it
says, "[The kohen shall have the woman stand before G-d] and uncover the
head of the woman, (Bamidbar 5:18)". (Kesuvos 72a)
In other words, part of the procedure of humiliation of the Sotah was the
uncovering of her hair, which, we are assuming, was covered to begin with.
But, perhaps all women covered their hair in Moshe's time, including single
women? As a matter of halachah? Hardly; it is extremely unlikely that only
part of the halachah would still survive, that part which only pertains to
As a matter of "tradition"? It is also highly unlikely that only that
aspect of the tradition would remain today. Besides, what would be the
point of uncovering the Sotah's hair, if all women covered their hair, and,
if it was only a matter of tradition, and not law?
In any case, all of these questions are predicated on the belief that the
Talmud, without the Sotah-source, would be at a loss regarding the basis
for the strong halachah of a married woman covering her hair. Why else
would the Talmud ask such a question, regarding the source?
The answer is, that, the obligation to cover one's hair after marriage is
based in the Oral Law, just like the details of proper ritual slaughter,
or, the proper construction of kosher Tefillin. However, we have a
tradition that all details of the Oral Law are, at least, hinted to in the
Written Law, on the level of either remez (literary hints), drush
(exegetical teachings), or sod (Kabbalah). The Talmud's true question:
What part of the Written Torah can be considered the basis for the Oral Law
halachah -- received from G-d Himself, via Moshe Rabbeinu -- of a married
woman covering her hair?
Can there be a more direct, more obvious source in the Written Torah than
the verse commanding the uncovering of the Sotah's hair (5:18), as if to
say: You have acted as a single women through your act of infidelity, and
now your hair covering, the symbol of your relationship with your husband,
shall also be removed.
As in so many cases, by identifying this written source for this oral law,
the Talmud has "married" together the Written and Oral Torah, something, as
the Pri Tzaddik explains (Parashas Balak), is a major part of Talmudic
learning. In fact, it is compared to the process of bringing man and wife
together into sublime unity, just as we are told to unify the two "parts"
of G-d's holy Four-Letter Name. Doing so represents the end of exile and
the arrival of redemption -- on ALL levels.
In fact, there is an interesting account in the Midrash, regarding the
story of Korach's rebellion later on in the same book, that can be explain
along these lines. The story is of On ben Pelet, whom the Torah tells us
was meant to be part of Korach's unsuccessful and disastrous rebellion
against Moshe's right to leadership, but whom, through his wife's genius,
was spared Korach's result (Bamidbar 16:1).
According to the Midrash, Korach, a Levi, had all of his HAIR shaven from
his body, as commanded by G-d. Upon seeing her very bald husband (hence,
"Korach," which means "bald"), Korach's wife complained bitterly, contested
Moshe's authority, and incited her husband to rebel. In turn, Korach, upon
his wife's advice, instigated others to join his rebellion, including On
However, unlike Korach's wife, On ben Pelet's wife saw the rebellion as
being completely wrong and futile. She had accepted Moshe's
Divinely-ordained right to lead, and all of his teachings -- especially His
ORAL ones -- as being from the mouth of G-d. She convinced her husband of
this, and told him not to participate, unless he wanted to meet with doom.
"But," On ben Pelet told his wife, "tomorrow they will come for me Š How
will I avoid going with them?"
"You just stay here," On's wife answered him. "In fact, get drunk and get
into bed, and tomorrow, when they come for you, I will tell them that you
just cannot get out of bed."
On ben Pelet's wife had acted as an "aizer" (helpmeet) -- Korach's wife had
played the role of a "k'negdo" (against him; see Rashi on Bereishis 1:18).
Right on schedule, the next day, Korach's men came to fetch On; any
rebellion against Moshe Rabbeinu needed as much fire power as possible.
However, as they approached On ben Pelet's tent, they found his wife
sitting by its entrance, and, to their utter amazement and shock, says the
Midrash, they found her sitting there with her hair uncovered!
Not ones to even talk to a married woman with her hair uncovered, they
simply turned around and went back to from where they had come. Leaving On
ben Pelet drunk, asleep, and in safety. When the ground eventually opened
up and swallowed Korach's followers, says the Midrash, it opened up until
On ben Pelet's bed, sending him a stern message about his near death
experience for rebelling against Moshe. He had been saved by his heroic
The only question is, why did she uncover her hair in public like that? HOW
could she uncover her hair like that, if doing so is such a violation of
The answer is that she was making a point to Korach and his rebellious
camp: You dispute the authority of the Oral Law? Well, take this! A married
woman's hair! which is from that SAME Oral Law Š which, apparently, you
accept to be true. And, if so, then it is not because you truly believe
that Moshe is making up law that you are rebelling, but rather, because you
It is certainly interesting, to say the least, that hair played such a
major role in Korach's rebellion against Moshe Rabbeinu, and by extension,
the entire Oral Law. However, as we shall now discuss, it will also
perfectly understandable once we look at hair through the eyes of Torah,
and, Western Society.
All the days of his vow to be a nazir, no razor shall go across his head
until the fulfillment of the days of being a nazir. He shall be holy; the
hair of his head shall grow wild (perah).
Following on the heals of the mitzvah of the Sotah is the halachah
regarding the Nazir -- the man or woman who vows to abstain from wine and
wine-related products, and several other restrictions due to the person's
changed spiritual status.
One such restriction of being a Nazir is the halachah to not take care of
one's hair; it is to grow wild -- just like the Sotah's hair becomes when
unwrapped by the priest:
The kohen shall have the woman stand before G-d and uncover (pharah) the
head of the woman Š (Bamidbar 5:18)
-- a clear connection between the two parshios, for, in each case, the
words are spelled, peh-reish-ayin. This is aside from the other important
connection the Talmud makes between the Sotah and Nazir:
Why is [Tractate] Nazir [in the Book of Women]? The Tanna is basing himself
upon the posuk: If she does not find favor in his eyes, because she has
acted unfaithfully Š (Devarim 24:1). What caused her to sin? Wine! As it
says: All who see the Sotah in her predicament takes an oath to abstain
from wine. (Nazir 2a)
In fact, the letters peh-reish-ayin, are the basis of the word used to
describe the licentiousness (or, in this context, the constraint of
licentiousness; see Rashi) of those who worshipped the golden calf while
Moshe was away from the camp, on top of Mt. Sinai:
Moshe saw that the people had been restrained (parah), because Aaron had
restrained (paroah) them by doing only a small part of what some demanded
to be done. (Shemos 32:25)
Not coincidentally, these letters are also the root letters of the word
"Pharaoh" -- the very symbol of immorality and sensual living from which
the Jewish people were supposed to have fled! Certainly, given the emphasis
Western Society places on hair care (a multi-billion dollar industry while
people starve from want of basic foods in other parts of the world), and
the role the appearance of hair plays in the attraction of men for women
and vice versa, one can see how hair can symbolize sensuous living, and
narcissist behavior, as the Talmud portrays:
Shimon HaTzaddik said: All the days of my life, I never ate from the
Transgression-Offering of a Nazir who had become defiled except for one who
came to me from the South. He had beautiful eyes and was pleasant to look
at, and his locks were well-kept and hung down. I said to him,
"My son, what did you see that made you want to destroy such beautiful hair?"
He answered me, "I was a shepherd for my father in my city, and I went to
draw water from a spring. I saw my reflection, and my yetzer hara took hold
of me and wished to tear me from this world. I told him, 'Empty one! Why do
you become proud in a world that is not yours, at the end of which you will
become a worm, and your work will rot?! I will shave for the sake of Heaven!'."
I stood up, and kissed him on his head, and said to him, "There should be
more Nazirs like you in the world!" (Nazir 4b)
In fact, the following Talmudic source spells out just how much this is so
by revealing the role of a married woman's hair covering:
Ten curses came to Chava [for eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and
Evil] Š She must cover like one in mourning (Rashi: It will be embarrassing
to go out with her hair uncovered)Š (Eiruvin 100b)
Why would the sin of eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil
necessitate such a response from G-d? Because, as the following Talmudic
passage reveals, the calm and orderliness of Chava's hair was part and
parcel of Woman's creation, and G-d's gift to the first wife of history:
G-d caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept. He then took
one of his ribs, and after, closed the flesh in its place. G-d built
(vayivein) the rib into a woman, and He brought her to the man. (Bereishis
Rebi Shimon ben Menasi elucidated: Why does it say, "vayivein" ("and He
built," as opposed to the normal "vayitzar," "and He formed")? We learn
from this that The Holy One, Blessed is He, braided Chava's [hair], and
then brought her to Adam. (Brochos 61a)
Hence, we learn, that the status of a woman's hair changes at the time she
is married to her zivug, her soul-mate. The "reigning in" of her hair
symbolizes the discipline she brings to herself and to her family upon
making the commitment to a single male. And through this, we shall see, she
brings blessing to herself, her husband, and her entire family, even
affecting the uprightness of her descendants!
For, the word "yivein" is also in common with the word "binah," or
"understanding," referring here to the woman's "Binah Yesayrah" -- the
"Extra (Intuitive) Understanding" with which a woman, particularly at
marriage, is endowed. She gains this extra insight to help her husband
steer the family correctly across the waters of confusion of everyday life,
and it is, according to this, intricately dependent upon her covering of
The only question is, why the hair, of all parts of the body? It is the
least attached (you can pull out plenty without major consequence to your
health)! To answer this question, and pull the whole matter together under
one covering, we will have to consult the more esoteric side of Torah.
G-d said, "Let us make Man in Our image, in Our likeness" Š G-d cre-ated
mankind in His image; He created him in the image of G-d, male and female.
Up until this point, we have only seen sources that the covering of a
married woman's hair is a Torah mitzvah, and, that it is elucidated in the
Mishnah and Talmud. And, even though there are many who wish to dispute
this halachah today, they must understand that they are also taking on the
entire line of Torah transmitters -- the greatest rabbis the Jewish people
have ever produced.
Furthermore, there is a concept that, although the same mitzvos apply in
all generations (except for those related to the Temple service), some
prove to be more of a test for one generation than for other generations.
Eretz Yisroel, and hair covering are proving to be tests of Jewish
spirituality specifically in this post-war, glamour-oriented generation.
But why should a woman's hair represent so much? Like for all of Torah, the
clearer, more esoteric explanation lies in the realm of Kabbalah, the
ULTIMATE source of ALL Torah concepts.
As the Zohar explains, when the Torah says that man was created in the
"image of G-d," it means, more precisely, in the image of the Sefiros.
Sefiros are spiritual emanations, and they act like spiritual transformers
to "filter" the light of G-d, so that we, the world, and our free-will can
exist. Otherwise, the Torah intimates and Kabbalah explains, G-d's light
would remain too pure and lofty for anything physical to exist. The ten
Sefiros are in descending order:
(Ain Sof, or, G-d's light)
Netzach (Dominance; Eternity)
According to Kabbalah, the Sefiros are arranged in the spiritual realm in a
similar fashion to how man has been formed in the physical realm, and that
it is to this established reality that the term "in the image of G-d"
refers. This puppet-like correspondence allows creation to be spiritually,
and ultimately, physically responsive to the deeds of man (e.g., when a
person sins with his hands, then, it damages the part of the Sefiros that
correspond to the hands, etc.). The correspondence is as follows:
Netzach (Dominance; Eternity)
I have said in one paragraph what is the subject of many central and deep
books, and would require just as many to fully explain this idea. However,
it suffices to set up the analogy that, just as a man's and woman's head
grows hair, so, too, is there a concept of "hair" in the world of the
Sefiros. And, just as hair sits on top of a man, like a crown on the
holiest part of his body, his head, so, too, does hair sit on top of the
uppermost sefirah -- Keser -- also called "Crown." In fact, its level in
creation is so high, that, for the most part, we are forbidden even to make
reference to it.
However, whereas human hair may serve little function other than for
appearance-sake, or to keep us warm, in the Sefiros, the "hair" functions
like little spiritual conduits, through which the light of G-d can begins
its descent to the lower Sefiros, and, eventually, us. In other words,
Sefirical hair represents the spiritual interface between a sefirah, and
the one after it, a kind of spiritual interface. This is true whether we
are looking at the entire, overall, general scheme of Sefiros, or, the
smaller sub-systems of Sefiros that exist within each one, like between
Chochmah (Wisdom) and Binah (Understanding).
I did not choose Chochmah and Binah randomly; I did so because, when
dealing with the Sefiros as worlds of their own, Chochmah plays the role of
the "father" ("Abba") within the system, and, "Binah" plays the role of the
"mother" ("Imma") within the entire system. The six Sefiros from Chesed
through Yesod are viewed as their "offspring."
Hence, in the Sefiros, Chochmah receives less distilled, more abstract
light from Keser, its prime source of light, and passes it on to Binah,
which receive it somewhat "filtered" by Chochmah. However, it is Binah's
role to filter the light additionally, this time enough to pass it on to
the children-Sefiros below, which represent the world in which WE live (six
Sefiros, six days of creation, six millennia of human history).
It works no differently, or should work no differently, in the ideal human
It has been the role of the husband to learn and gather information
necessary for the survival of society in general, and his family in
particular. However, the intelligence of children usually does not permit
them to relate to the knowledge of an adult in its pure form. Such
knowledge, which MUST be learned by children for the sake of their futures,
must be "filtered" and adapted, something usually done best by the female
In other words, within the family structure, the wife/mother acts as an
interface between the husband and children -- more than intelligent enough
to understand her husband, and, perfectly capable of relating to her
children on all levels. It is this way in the physical family because it is
this way in the Sefirical family.
Therefore, if the analogy is carried to its logical end, then, just like
the "hair" of Binah acts as the interface and medium through which to bring
over the light of Chochmah (Wisdom) to the level of Binah (Understanding),
so, too, does the hair of a married woman represent her connection to and
willingness to receive the "light" of her husband -- and ONLY her husband.
In fact, the letters of the Hebrew word for "hair" (s'ar) are the same as
that for the word "gate"(sha'ar): shin-ayin-reish. As is well known in
Kaballah, on the level of Binah, there is something referred to as the Nun
Sha'arei Binah -- The Fifty Gates of Understanding. On an exegetical level,
it could be read, "The Fifty Hairs of Understanding," suggesting that, just
like a gate acts as a threshold between two domains, so, too, does hair (at
least when it comes to Sefiros).
In other words, every man represents a "Chochmah" that belongs to a system,
or family, of its own. Likewise, every woman represents a "Binah" that also
belongs to a particular sub-system of Sefiros, and the concept of a zivug
("soul-mate") is the concept of pairing up the right Chochmah with the
right Binah. The covering of the woman's hair AT MARRIAGE signifies
SPIRITUALLY and PHYSICALLY the special and unique connection between a
specific Chochmah and Binah -- husband and wife.
However, before a woman is married, she is in a position to receive wisdom
from many sources, her father, her mother, teachers, some of which may be
female OR MALE, and her exposed hair signifies this. However, once she is
married (something, the Talmud reveals, with which G-d is directly
involved; Sotah 2a), she is -- theoretically at least -- supposed to look
to her husband as her prime source of abstract knowledge for her own
personal growth and to filter to her children to build them up.
This is also why the process of marriage is called "kiddushin," which means
"sanctification," as in the woman is "sanctified" to a single man
(Kiddushin 2b, see the second Tosfos there).
Thus, according to Kabbalah, the covering of a married woman's hair,
leaving the viewing of her hair permissible only to her husband (and,
technically, her father as well), physically symbolizes her devotion to her
own personal source of Chochmah. However, perhaps, more importantly,
SPIRITUALLY, it solidifies the connection between herself and her husband
in the Sefiros, which, understandably, can have long term and eternal
ramifications; it can affect the "shalom bayis" (peace in the house) in
This World, but worst, it can eternally weaken the connection to her
husband in the World-to-Come!
To the extent that a married Jewish woman covers her hair, that is the
extent to which it affects the spiritual bond between herself and her
husband, and, as we will learn from Kimchis, her children as well.
This is why the hair of the Sotah was uncovered. Whether she actually lay
with another man or not, she had allowed herself to end up in a predicament
that could very well have led to such a violation of her marriage and
Society. She may have enjoyed short term pleasure, but, she learns the hard
way, she has damaged the long term connection to her husband in the world
within which no yetzer hara operates, and, true and honest relationships
are desired and enjoyed forever -- if they are cultivated and preserved in
It will be a time when external beauty will be a thing of the past, because
inner beauty, the kind that emerges from one's commitment to values higher
than one's self, will brilliantly shine. How we deal with ourselves, our
appearances, and our relationships in This World is the deciding factor
regarding what we will be dealt in the future world, what we will be able
to enjoy FOREVER in the World-to-Come.
And, given the emphasis on physical appearance today (boy, does the yetzer
hara have a strangle hold on us), clearly one's willingness to go against
the tide and reign in her hair counts for a tremendous amount in Heaven --
just like those who give up some material comfort to pursue the
spirituality of Eretz Yisroel. At a time when the source of human dignity
-- man's gift of godliness -- is all but destroyed, to rebuild human
dignity means the world to G-d and the world He created.
In conclusion, just like you have to appreciate that there is a lot more to
be said here to further clarify the issue from a Torah perspective, I
appreciate that many questions will arise from what has been said, and, I
will, b'ezras Hashem Yisborach, do my best to answer anyone who takes the
time to write and ask.
As a concluding note, one of the most famous "hair-stories" in the Talmud
is that of Kimchis, the mother who merited to have seven sons become High
Priest -- Kohen Gadol -- during Temple times. They asked Kimchis, "What did
you do to merit such reward?" She answered them that the beams of her house
-- something a woman is supposed to build with her Binah Yesayrah -- never
saw the braids of her hair (Yoma 47a). Even in her most private moments,
she strove to keep her hair covered.
Bas Sheva, says the Midrash, was no different. For, even when she washed
her hair, she had her attendant hold a towel over her hair so that it not
become overly exposed, even IN HER HOUSE. It was King David, whom, while
shooting at a bird and missed, instead hit the towel and caused Bas Sheva's
hair to become temporarily revealed.
Dovid HaMelech took this bizarre act of Divine Providence to be a sign from
Heaven that she was ready to be taken to him as a wife, even while she
remained married to her former husband, Uri the Hittite. Heaven, however,
looks at this event at punishment for Dovid's haughtiness, and it led to
all kinds of problems for him afterward.
Hence, we see that, just as Western Society makes a big deal about women's
hair, so, too, does the Torah. However, unlike Western Society, which
promotes the "right" of a woman to allow her hair to be "paruah," the Torah
emphasizes the need to use hair as a symbol of commitment and self-discipline.
In a very real sense (more than is proper to discuss in this forum), Chava,
the first woman, was also the first Sotah. She had acted more loyal to the
snake than to her own husband, from whom she had been built and brought to
by G-d Himself! No matter what Adam had failed to teach her, still, she
ought to have consulted with him before eating from the forbidden Tree of
Knowledge of Good and Evil. Therefore, is it any wonder that when a married
woman properly covers her hair, it is also an important part of the
rectification for what went wrong in the Garden?
I love Him, because G-d listens to my voice, my supplication (Tehillim 116:1)
Like the previous portion of Hallel, this tehillah is also divided into two
sections, the first part not being said on the last six days of Pesach and
on Rosh Chodesh. Here, Dovid HaMelech speaks with certainty about the fact
that G-d listens to his prayers, and, we must assume, to ours as well.
"So, why doesn't He give me what I ask for?!" people often exclaim.
"Listen He always does Š grant your request? That depends upon whether
doing so is good for you and the world Š" is the usual answer.
G-d protects the fools Š (6)
Now THIS is an interesting statement. In English phraseology, this probably
translates into, "What you don't know won't hurt you!" And now we know why:
Because G-d protects the fools.
However, there are fools and then there are fools, or better yet, those who
fool themselves. From a Torah perspective, you are only responsible for
what you could have known, but did not come to know, for reasons of your
own. Looking the other way only counts when there was no other way for you
to look, or, at least, there was a good reason to look that way at the time.
In fact, the statement of "G-d protects the fools" is often used in
situations of halachically- reasonable risk (Shabbos 129b; Yevamos 12b).
For example, when many people do something that may be somewhat risky for
one's health, but statistically, nothing has become conclusive, then
halachically, one can continue to perform the act and not worry about the
consequences. Even should there be some latent danger in the act, G-d will
intercede on the person's behalf and protect the "fool."
For a long time, cigarette smoking fell into this category. Though the
Torah is against all kinds of physical addiction for obvious reasons, as
long as there wasn't conclusive proof that the risk factor wasn't as great
as we now know it to be, and many people smoked without negative results,
it remained halachically permissible to do so; G-d protects the fools.
However, cigarette smoking is now known to be the number one man-made
killer of human beings, and this consciousness has made its way into the
Torah world, albeit somewhat late. We are no longer "fools" with respect to
the effects of cigarette smoking, and, the Poskim (those who decide
Torah-law) have now posted signs asking those who still smoke to begin
weaning themselves from doing so. For years already, however, they have
forbid anyone to start smoking.
Addictions take many forms. Some are more notorious than others, because
they interfere with an objective and productive PHYSICAL lifestyle.
However, some are equally if not more (QUIETLY) notorious because they
interfere with an objective and productive SPIRTUAL lifestyle, such as, you
guessed it, living in ERETZ YISROEL.
When it comes to quitting cigarette smoking, or any other form of physical
addiction, there are usually two basic responses: "There is nothing wrong
with doing it" Š or, (the more honest approach,) "I know I ought to quit,
but it is just so hard Š"
Which person does Heaven favor? To which person will G-d send Heavenly help?
When it comes to yearning and planning to live in Eretz Yisroel, there are
also the same two responses: "It is not important to want to live there
now, and, certainly it is not important to move there" Š or, there is the
more honest approach, "I know I ought to want to, and I should look at the
feasibility of doing so, but it is so hard Š"
While sitting on an airplane, I could see the headline of an article in a
paper another passenger was reading across the aisle. I did not read the
article myself, but the headline summed it up: NEW STUDY SAYS AMERICAN JEWS
DEEPLY ROOTED IN AMERICAN SOCIETY.
Canada, the United States, South Africa, England -- all of them may be nice
places to visit, but they make lousy addictions. They may not hinder our
physical development, but, lacking in kedushah, they certainly don't do
very much for our spiritual development either. Like Ya'akov before us, we
were only supposed to sojourn "there"; like his descendants after him, we
have "excelled" there, rooted there, become absorbed there.
In fact, according to one rabbi, statistics from the 50's suggested that,
by the year 2000, 20,000,000 Jews should have been located in the United
States. I believe that the number of Jews in America as of this year hovers
around the 6,000,000 mark, bli ayin hara. Where did the other 14,000,000
Jews? They certainly didn't make aliyah, and, they didn't vanish into thin
When I told this to one person living in the States on my last trip, she
recounted a story she remembered from a little while back. She had met
someone who complained about being a Christian, and, just by the way, she
had mentioned that her grandmother's religion seemed more meaningful.
"And what religion was that," the woman asked this "non-Jew" innocently.
"She was Jewish," the woman responded.
Suspicious, the woman probed further, "Was she your maternal or paternal
grandmother?" she asked.
Sure enough, and without skipping a beat, the supposed non-Jew answered,
"My mother's mother. She was my maternal grandmother."
The woman was Jewish, and had no clue. But, how many others like her are
there in America, or anywhere else in the world? There are many other ways
to strip a Jew of his or her heritage, some working faster than others. One
of them is abandoning the concept of redemption, and a desire to return to
At the end of the this week's parshah, we read about the dedication of the
Mishkan. The Mishkan was the Divine response to the golden calf; the golden
calf was the Erev Rav's desire to go back to Egypt, if not physically, at
least in spirit. We have never recovered since from the catastrophe, and
the golden calf remains to be the source of all our mistaken desires and
goals to this very day, be it a lack of desire to live in Eretz Yisroel,
or, a lack of willingness to properly cover one's hair.
The two issues are very much intertwined, and playing the fool in either
won't help. Looking the "other way" only tricks us, but not G-d. It is a
temporary world we live in (you know, hair today, gone tomorrow). To be
Jewish is to make ETERNAL choices, or, more accurately, it is to know that
ALL of our choices have ETERNAL ramifications, and knowing this, to make
them wisely, now. So,
I shall walk before G-d, in the lands of the living. (9)
Have a great and restful Shabbos. After reading this entire d'var Torah,
you've earned it.