Question
Numbers 14:24 says, "But My servant Kaleb, because he had another spirit with him, and has followed Me fully, him will I bring into the land where he went into; and his seed shall possess it. What other "spirit" was with Kaleb? Was it the "Shkanyah" - Divine glory?" and "dweller with Hashem" that is spelled Shin~Kaf~Nun~Yud~Hei? The verse seems to imply that this other "spirit" reflects complete obedience to the will of G-d. What was different about Kaleb such that this other "spirit" was to abide with him? I find it interesting that the Torah doesn't imply this other " spirit" was " within" Kaleb -- or does it?

Question
The word "tuwr" as a verb meaning to seek, search, spy out, explore, make a reconnaissance, be excellent. It is made from the holy Hebrew letters. Tav~Vav~Resh compose "tuwr". I find it intriguing that these same letters (Tav~Vav~Resh) are in the word "Torah" (Tav~Vav~Resh~Hei). Torah is the mandate for all mankind whether "Yehudi" or "Gentile". It seems like the point is that we are to study Torah as if on a reconnaissance mission. This involves search and exploration, thereby elevating one's " spirit" to excellence. Isn't the real purpose of God's chosen people to teach and "spiritually uplift" all people through the rith of the Torah, such that there is no ignorant soul who be eternally severed from God? Shouldn't all who are willing, receive? Proverbs 24:23 says, These things also belong to the wise. It is not good to have respect of persons in judgment. Irrespective of "freewill," God's will for men is knowledge and obedience to the Torah. This is the " greater commission." Rabbi, don't you agree?

Question
In the American Declaration of Independence, it famously states: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Is this the view of the Torah?

Question
I recently found this idea during Talmud studies with some friends. Rambam's statements seem to indicate that no human can alter or create new laws contrary to Hashem's eternal written Torah laws. Your insight would be greatly appreciated. Mishneh Torah, Foundations of the Torah 9 “It is a clear and manifest principle concerning the Torah that as a Law it is permanently established forever and ever more; and that it is not subject to mutability, nor to diminution, nor to amendment; for it is said: "All this word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do; thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it" (Ibid. 13.1); and it is further said: "But the things that are revealed belong unto us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law" (Ibid. 29.28). Here from we learn that according to all the words of the Torah we are commanded to do forever. It is, moreover, said: "a statute forever throughout your generations" (Num. 15:15); and again, it is said: 1See Bava Mezi’a 59b:5. C. "It is not in heaven" (Deut. 30:12); here from we learn that no prophet is thereafter permitted to make any innovation. Therefore, should a man rise up, whether he be from among the Gentiles or whether from among Israel, and deliver a token and perform a miracle saying, that God hath sent him to add a commandment, or to diminish a commandment, or to interpret a certain commandment of among the commandments with such interpretation as we have not heard by tradition (statute) from Moses; or he said, that these commandments with which Israel was charged are not forever and throughout all generations, but that they were commandments in keeping with those times only, behold him, he is a false prophet, seeing that he came to deny the prophecy of Moses; and his punishment is death by strangulation, because he willfully spoke in the name of God concerning that which He did not charge him; for He, blessed is He! commanded Moses, saying, that this enactment was "unto us and unto our children forever" (Deut. 29:28); and, "God is not a man that He should lie" (Num. 23:19). But, why then is it said in the law: I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren LIKE UNTO THEE, (Deut. 18:18)? The answer is, that he (the prophet) is not to come to establish any new law, but only to enjoin the observation of the existing law, and to warn the people that they should not trespass against it; just as the last of the prophets said: Remember ye the law of Moses, my servant, (Mal. 3:22). Moreover, if he (the prophet) were to charge us with anything respecting private matters; as, for instance: go into that place, or do not go; join battle today, or do not join battle; build this wall, or do not build it; we are likewise' commanded to hearken unto him. And he who trespasses against his words, will be visited with punishment of death by Heaven, for it is said; IM And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto My words which he shall speak in My name, I WILL REQUIRE IT OF HIM, (Deut. 18:19) Moreover, a prophet who trespasses against his own words, or suppresses his prophecy, will likewise be visited with punishment of death by Heaven; and it is with regard to these three cases, that it is said: I will require it of him. Also, if a prophet, whom we know to be a prophet, were to tell us that we should trespass against any one of the commandments stated in the law, or even against several commandments, whether they be slight or important ones, for a certain time only; we are commanded to hearken unto him. For thus we are taught by the sages of old, who received traditionally: “In everything that the prophet bids thee trespass against the words of the law, as in the case of Elijah on mount Carmel, (as recorded in (I Kings 18), hearken unto him except in matters of idolatry.” This bidding of the prophet, however must be an exceptional one for present circumstances, as was with Elijah on mount Carmel, namely, when he offered a burnt offering without Jerusalem, though that city alone was chosen for this purpose, and though he who offers a sacrifice without Jerusalem deserves Careth (excision); but notwithstanding this, because he was a prophet, we were commanded to hearken unto him; for in such cases Scripture says: Unto him ye shall hearken, (Deut. 18: 15). Now had one asked Elijah and said unto him: “How can we break that which is written in the law: that thou offer not thy burnt offerings in every place that thou seest, (Deut. 12: 13)?” he would have answered thus: Scripture only says that he who always offers sacrifices without Jerusalem is guilty of Careth (excision) to be cut off, as Moses has commanded us; but as for myself, I shall offer a sacrifice without Jerusalem this day only, [and this I do] by the command of the Lord, in order to refute the prophets of Baal. And in this manner any one of the prophets order us to transgress a commandment temporarily, we are commanded to hearken unto him; but if he says that the thing is to be broken forever, he renders himself amenable to death by strangulation; for the law says: Unto us and to our children FOR EVER, (Deut. 29:28). And in like manner if he (the prophet) propose to break any of the ordinances which we have learned by tradition (statute); or if he say, with respect to any point of the law, that the Lord had made known to him that such was the decision, or that [in any rabbinical controversy] the point ought to be decided by the opinion of such and such a person; (Bava Metzia 86a:7) that man is a false prophet, and amenable to death by strangulation, although he performs a sign; for he came to deny the law, which says: It is not in Heaven, (Deut. 30:12); but in temporary matters we must hearken unto him in everything. The above, however, applies only to all other commandments; but as regards matters of idolatry, we do not hearken unto him, even temporarily. And were he even to perform great signs and wonders, yet if he say that the Lord commanded him that some idol should be worshipped, though for that day only, or for that hour only—then this man has spoken to turn you away from the Lord, and with respect to such a one Scripture commands as follows: And the sign or the wonder come to pass...Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet...Because he hath spoken TO TURN YOU AWAY FROM THE LORD YOUR GOD, (Deut. 13: 2, 3, 5). For behold! this man came to deny the prophecy of Moses; and therefore we know for a certainty that he is a false prophet, and that which he performed was done by deception and illusion, and he has rendered himself amenable to death by strangulation. B”H  

Question
2 Kings 13:14: "Now Elisha was fallen sick of his sickness, whereof he died." I'm perplexed by this Torah passage. Elisha asked and received a double portion of Eliyahu's spirit. Eliyahu never tasted physical death and Elisha was endowed with his mentor's quickening power. He possessed supernatural abilities in a finite world. Why then would illness cause his demise? According to 2 Kings 13:21, a corpse touched Elisha's bones and was restored to life. How then could Elisha succumb to sickness with chayah (Chet~Yud~Hei) infusing his bones, joints and marrow?

Question
Hope you're doing well dear rabbi. When I read the Chumash with a commentary, I see that rabbis have machloket all the time and they seem to 'guess' things, as if they're not 100% sure on what they're talking about. For instance; Rav A says "Oh, Jacob did this because of x", and Rav B says, "No, that's not the case. He did it because of y." Now, this is an historical event we're talking about. Both of them can't be right at the same time. For instance: Artscroll Chumash page 187: "Why Deborah was with Jacob at this point is the subject of another dispute between Rashi and Ramban. Rashi cites R' Moshe HaDarshan who states that she was the nurse Laban had given to Rebecca when she left to mary Isaac. (24:59). Rebecca — not knowing that Jacob was on the way — had sent Deborah to Haran to tell him that it was finally safe for him to return home, but the aged nurse died on the way home. Ramban maintains that it is unlikely that Rebecca would have sent an elderly woman on such a strenuous trip. He suggests that Deborah had returned to Paddan-aram after Rebecca's marriage, but when Jacob left Laban, he took Deborah with him, so that in tribute to his mother Rebecca, he would support her childhood nurse in her old age." end quote. One of them is 100% wrong, no? So how am I going to trust the wrong side on everything else he says from that point on? And I've seen many times Rashi admit "I don't know what this means". True, on some halachic issues they both can be right at the same time. But history is history. And it's not like secular history. We're not really sure what Napoleon did back in the day but we MUST be sure what patriarch Jacob A"H did. Don't Jews have the best mesorah in the world? An unbroken chain from Har Sinai? If yes, why isn't everything crystal clear? Thank you

Question
Yirmiyah 31:31 declares a new covenant instituted with Yisrael and Yehuda. The old covenant is nullified. Does that include the 613 mitzvahs?

Question
Hi Rabbi, Can you tell me what Mesachta and Daf number they are learning in Daf Yomi? Also what is the next Mesachta?

Question
Hi. I'm working with a friend's son on his bar mitzah dvar torah for parshat Emor. In Perek 24 pasuk 18, it says "One who kills a beast shall make restitution for it: life for life. " (the translation is taken from Sefaria.org). This pasuk follows the story about the half-Egyptian/half-Israelite who blasphemes and is then stoned by the community. In the verses nearby we read about a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Then we read again that if an animal's life is taken restitution is made. Here's my question (and I didn't see anything in the commentary that addresses it). These two verses don't say that these animals who were killed belonged to anyone. Is that strictly implied? Or do we take it literally, that some kind of restitution must be made if we kill any animal? What if it's an animal that lives freely in the wild, that we kill intentionally or accidentally? Is some kind of restitution due for even an ownerless animal? If yes, how or to whom does one make that restitution? Thank you for your help.

Question
Dear Rabbi, I found a prophecy in Isaiah that I thought might be speaking about the recent return of the Jews from Britain and the English Empire. The verse says, “For the isles will hope for Me, and the ships… to bring your sons from afar, their silver and their gold with them, in the name of the Lord your God and for the Holy One of Israel, for He has glorified you.” (60:9) It seems to me that this refers to the return of the Jewish people to their homeland "Israel" by ships and would be about their return after 1948. And it seems to me that the "isle" in this verse is "Britain." Britain is an isle and I am not aware of the Jewish people ever returning to their homeland in ships from any other nation. Am I on to something, Rabbi? Thanks!