For Your Information

The Torah has two kinds of Parshiyot (sort of like paragraphs) - OPEN and CLOSED. Although there are different scribal ways of indicating which type a parsha is, today's Sifrei Torah use one "standardized" method of indicating each type.

A Parsha P'TUCHA, open parsha, begins at the beginning of a line, with a blank space of a certain minimum length at the end of the previous line.

A Parsha S'TUMA, closed parsha, begins on the same line as the previous parsha ended, with a suitable space between the last letter of the previous parsha and the first letter of the new one.

The existence of the parshiyot and which type they are, are matters of Tradition. These divisions in the Torah are the only divisions; there is no indication in the Torah as to the end of a pasuk (and certainly not of perek). Just Parshiyot. (Do not confuse this term Parsha with Parshat HaShavua; they are not the same.A specific Parshat HaShavua can be made up of many Parshiyot.)

Which brings us to this week's sedra - VAY'CHI. There is no space (except for the normal space between words) between the end of Vayigash and the beginning of Vay'chi. One can see this as a Super-Closed Parsha, or as no Parsha at all. According to the latter way of looking at it, Va'y'chi starts in the middle of the lastParsha of Vayigash. This would be another way of discribing the state of the beginning of Va'y'chi been very closed off.

Why is Va'y'chi super-closed? Two answers are offered. Yaakov Avinu wanted to tell his sons about the future. G-d "closed off" his ability to do this. Furthermore, with the deaths of Yaakov and his sons, the first stage in what is soon to become the Nation of Israel comes to an end. This parsha - this part of the story- is closed.

Following the first parsha of the sedra, we find 6 open parshiyot including Reuven, Shimon & Levi, Yehuda, Zevulun, and Yissachar. This is followed by 5 closed parshiyot for Dan, Gad, Asher, Naftali, and Yosef. Binyamin begins the open, long, final parsha of the sedra and the Book of B'reishit. Why is there a differencefrom Tribe to Tribe? I don't know. There probably are commentaries who explain the distinctions.

Meaning in Mitzvot by Rabbi Asher Meir

Each week we will discuss one familiar halakhic practice and try to demonstrate its beauty and meaning. The columns are based on the work “Meaning in Mitzvot”; you can subscribe by visiting Yeshivat Har Etzion’s “Virtual Beit Midrash”, www.vbm-torah.org.

“BARUKH SHEM KEVOD MALKHUTO LE'OLAM VA'ED”

In our parsha, Yaakov Avinu gathers his sons before his death, saying “Gather together and I will tell you what will happen to you at the end of days”. (Bereshit 49:1.) But the blessings Yaakov proceeds to give have only a tenuous connection to the time of the redemption. Rashi, based on Pesachim 56a, explains that whenhe sought to reveal the “end”, the shechina left him.

The gemara continues: He said, perhaps I have some unworthy offspring [and therefore the Divine Presence won’t let me reveal]? His sons replied with the Shema: “Hear, Israel, HaShem is our God, HaShem is one” - just as there is only One in your heart, so there is only One in our heart.” Then Yaakov exclaimed, “Barukh shemkevod malkhuto leolam vaed”. The Rabbis said, shall we too say [Barukh shem as part of Keriat Shema] - Moshe didn’t say it! [It’s not part of the written Torah.] Shall we omit it? Yaakov did say it! They decided that it should be recited in a whisper.

Superficially, it seems that Yaakov was relieved by his sons’ declaration of faith. But Rav Yonatan Eibeschutz (“Yaarot Devash” I:15) paradoxically connects the barukh shem said after the sons’ Shema with another barukh shem: the one we say after mistakenly taking God’s name in vain, to show that we still hold His namein awe (see SA OC 206:6). The implication is that there is a hint of taking God’s name in vain in saying the Shema - we should be almost too awed to utter this profound declaration of God’s unity.

Should we then say “Barukh Shem” after Shema? Well, Moshe Rabbeinu did not say it. He was not overawed. After all, he spoke to HaShem face to face, as a man talks to his friend (Shemot 33:11; see also Bamidbar 12:8, Succah 49b).

But can we really omit it, boldly demonstrating our confidence in our high spiritual level? After all, Yaakov Avinu did say it. (It was characteristic of Yaakov that he was never sure of his spiritual level. See Bereshit 28:20-22, and especially 32:11 and Rashi’s commentary there.)

The solution is to say it in a whisper, displaying our feeling of awe but not denying our unique holiness which indeed enables us to utter the Shema.

Barukh Shem and the Ministering Angels

On Yom Kippur, we say barukh shem aloud. (SA OC 619:2.) This is a natural corollary of the great awe in which we hold God’s name at the height of the “Yamim Noraim”, “Days of Awe”.

However, we can also connect this to the reason mentioned in the halakhic works (see MB): that on Yom Kippur we are likened to angels.

The Talmud reveals that the Ministering Angels are not on a high enough spiritual level to recite the Shema as we do. (Chullin 91b.) For them, it would almost resemble a vain berakha. And the Midrash (Vaetchanan) explains that it was the angels who taught the phrase barukh shem to Moshe, who then taught it to the Jewishpeople.

Ultimately, our ability to unify God’s name within His creation is greater than that of the angels. The Shema is specially suited to the unique spiritual potential of the Jewish people, and so we need only say barukh shem in a whisper.

Rabbi Asher Meir is in the process of writing a monumental companion to Kitzur Shulchan Aruch which beautifully presents the meanings in our mitzvot and halacha. Rabbi Meir - who has given a series on Business Halacha at the Center, as well as three sessions of Meaning in Mitzvot - the Shiur. He will, IY"H, be continuingthe series on a regular basis. See back page for details.

THE JERUSALEM INSTITUTE OF JEWISH LAW

Rabbi Emanuel Quint, Dean

Lesson #20 (Part 3 of 4) - Composition of the Beth Din - The Single Judge

In the prior two lessons we discussed the composition of the Beth Din. This is the court before which all litigants bring their disputes. The dispute is either settled, or a decision is rendered determining the rights and obligations and liabilities of the parties.

As stated in the last lesson, the parties to a dispute may stipulate that fewer than three judges decide their dispute. In this lesson we discuss the role of a single judge deciding a dispute not resulting from a stipulation to that effect.

It was stated in lesson #18 “there was a Rabbinic enactment that is cited in the Talmud that ‘Monetary cases are judged by three judges, and one who is a recognized expert may judge monetary cases alone’”. (Sanhedrin 4b). What follows is then Talmudic law on the subject of a single judge judging a lawsuit.

A “recognized expert” is one who is learned in Torah, Mishna and Gemara and is capable of reasoning by applying his learning to new situations. In addition he must have substantial experience as a judge, with his decisions generally being free from error. A recognized expert may judge cases by himself, even though he doesnot have authorization from the community to judge. He may compel the litigants to appear before him or punish them for failure to appear in response to a summons.

An “expert” is one who is learned in Torah, Mishna and Gemara and is capable of applying his learning to new situations. He lacks some of the experience of the recognized expert.

One who is “learned” knows the Torah, Mishna and Gemara but has not demonstrated that he can apply his learning.

Either an “expert” or a “learned person” may judge by himself if he has obtained authorization.

One who is a “layman” is not learned in Torah, Mishna and Gemara, and may not judge by himself even though he has obtained authorization. When ordination was practiced (see Lesson #8, Torah Tidbits #386, Succoth, Sep 24) ordination did not confer jurisdiction on a non-expert judge who has obtained authorization. All proceedingsbefore a non-expert judge who judges by himself are a nullity.

The practice has grown up for the last five hundred years that a judge does not judge by himself against the will of the litigants. However, if such a trial did take place, then it is valid.

There are situations where the individual judge or even two judges (see last week’s lesson) may not judge. What if the community appointed the single judge or the two judges to judge? What is the result of their decision? The following comes from a responsum of Rabbi David Ibn Zimra (Radvaz, Spain, Egypt, 1465-1574, Part3, Responsum 944) On what do they rely in Egypt when there is one Jewish governor or one Jewish judge? Is it not taught that a person should not judge by himself? Only God judges by Himself. The practice is the same in Jerusalem and in the entire kingdom. He answers that this practice is of very long standing going backalmost to the beginning of the Arab reign in Egypt. The caliph of Egypt married a Babylonian princess. When she came to live in Egypt she inquired whether the Jews had their own leader; the caliph replied that they did not. She informed him that in her father’s country there were many Jews and they had a leader known asthe Exilarch, who was descended from King David; and that her father was blessed through him and gave him great honor since he descended from kings and prophets. The caliph immediately issued a command to bring a Jew from Babylonia who was descended from King David. The Babylonian Jews sent a wise and understanding personfrom the family of the Exilarch and he was appointed governor of all of he Jews of the kingdom of Egypt. From that time the chain of Jewish governors in Egypt commenced. After there were no longer descendents of King David in Egypt, or there were no descendents who were worthy to be appointed, the governorship passed tothose who merited it on account of their wisdom and good deeds. They were able to judge individually in monetary cases, to punish, to flog, to put under a ban, and to excommunicate according to the exigency of the hour.

We see that the community may appoint one or two persons to act as the court of the community. Such a Beth Din has the authority of a Beth Din of three judges.

Rabbi Isaac ben Sheshet (Ribash, Spain, North Africa, 1326-1408, Responsum 271) decided the following case. The leading rabbi of France died. He had founded many schools of learning, had installed many rabbis and was accepted by the Jews of France as the head of the community. He was also so recognized by the King of France.During his lifetime he gave his son the title of rabbi whom the people decided would be a worthy successor to his father. The various Jewish communities accepted him as chief rabbi and the King of France approved the appointment. One of the father’s pupils, Rabbi Isaiah, went to Germany and the chief rabbi of Germany appointedRabbi Isaiah to be chief rabbi of France and placed anyone who opposed him under a ban. Rabbi Isaac b. Sheshet was asked to decide whether the decision of the chief rabbi of Germany was valid. Rabbi Isaac held that the chief rabbi of Germany did not have jurisdiction to decide the fate of France’s Jews since it was onlya single rabbi in Germany who made this decree of excommunication. Also the son is always first in line to fill the position of the father if he is capable, especially since he was designated by his father for the post. Moreover all of the communities of France had accepted him as their chief rabbi. Finally, the son wasappointed with the approval of the king of France, and in monetary matters the law of the secular government is the controlling law. Thus the new chief rabbi could judge cases by himself because he was given this authority by the king of France. Elaborating on the issue of acceptance by the community, Rabbi Isaac writesthat a person may not accept authority from the king without the consent of the community. One who does so opposes the community and will be called upon to give an accounting before God, even more so if he is not entitled to judge either because he does not know how or because he is personally not worthy to be a judge.Authorization from the secular government cannot legitimate his conduct. In the case before him the king appointed the son with the consent of he Jewish community. In such a situation the appointment by the king is entitled to great weight.

(This topic of a judge appointed by the secular authorities concludes IYH, next week.)

Last year's lead tidbit:

DOUBLE OR NOTHING AT 11:00PM

There's an old joke, with many variations and spin-offs, about two not-of-the-brightest-among-us fellows who bet on the outcome of an event that was being reported on the 6:00pm evening news. After the conclusion of the report, the loser of the bet offered his "rocket scientist" buddy double-or-nothing on the outcome ofthesame event when it would be reported at 11:00pm. The bet was accepted without either realizing that they would be watching a rebroadcast of the report whose conclusion was, therefore, pre-determined.

If you let your mind wander a bit, there is a similar feeling one sometimes gets at this post-Chanuka, Asara B'Tevet, just finishing the book of B'reishit time. Yaakov knew the problems set into motion by giving Yosef the K'tonet Pasim, so why does he give him one every year when we read parshat Vayeishev? Why do the brothersmakethe same devastating decisions vis-a-vis Yosef year aafter year. Etc. Etc.

The same "silly" question can be asked of many Biblical personalities - I just feel the question welling in me at this time of the year.

But here's my point. Of course, the Avot and the Sh'vatim, etc. cannot change what they did or didn't do. But their children can! We can change our behavior, by emulating our role models for good things and by shunning their behavior when Chaza"l teach us that they erred.

Sin'at Achim (hatred of brothers) is bad for us, even if one side feels religiously justified in its feelings for the other side. Yosef's brothers felt they were on solid halachic grounds in their behavior towards Yosef. That fact did not lessen the seriousness of the Sale of Yosef.

A youngster asked me yesterday why we "cry over spilled milk" in our continuing observance of Asara b'Tevet. We don't. The Churban of the Beit HaMikdash takes place continually. Any generation in whose time the Mikdash is not rebuilt, it is as if it was destroyed in that generation. Ezra and Nechemia sought to restore theTorahto the Jewish People and the Jewish People to the Land of Israel. They were successful - partially. They built the Beit HaMikdash, and that too was only partially successful.

The previous paragraph contains the three tasks of the Mashiach according to the Rambam. Our continued observance of the Four Fasts are meant to challenge us to pursue the goals of Ezra and Nechemia. to progress in the direction of Mashiach's tasks, so that we will be privileged to see the Complete Geula and the building of the Beit HaMikdash, speedily in our time, Amen. Each of us must continue to strive towards personal and communal improvement in all areas of Torah life - between the Jew and G-d and in our interpersonal relations. This is our share in our destiny.

Halacha & Hashkafa of a Sneeze

I am repeating this piece from past Va'y'chi TTs with thanks to my M'sadeir K'dushim, Rabbi Yehuda Leib Ginsburg, for turning a sneeze into an educational experience all those many years ago.

Section 270 of Shulchan Aruch Orech Chaim deals with "some personal brachot". Subsection 4 says that after medical treatment one should say BARUCH ROFEI CHOLIM, acknowledging G-d as the ultimate healer. In his commentary on the Shulchan Aruch, the Mishna B'rura, the Chafetz Chaim adds that when a person sneezes and hisfellowsays to him ASUTA (or Livriyut or the like), he (the sneezer) should say back to his fellow BARUCH T'H'YEH, and then say (not as a reply) LISHU'ATCHA KIVITI HASHEM (B'reishit 49:18).

The Mishna B'rura explains as follows: Our Sages tell us that originally, people did not get sick at all. (Perhaps this refers to the illness and deterioration prior to death; perhaps it means at all.) They would be "walking in the marketplace, sneeze and die". Torah T'mima ties this idea to the pasuk in B'reishit about G-dbreathing into his (Adam's) nostrils the living soul, and the pasuk in No'ach that refers to "everyone with the living breath in his nostrils died". The sneeze was the method by which the breath of life left a person. Literal or figurative, the sneeze is a symbol of the mortality of the human being.

Yaakov Avinu, say our sources, was the first to be ill prior to his passing. This he saw as a blessing from G-d, giving us time to put our affairs in order (among other things). He "put himself in G-d's hands". And he expressed this with the words LISHU'ATCHA KIVITI HASHEM.

We view a sneeze as a sign of an oncoming cold, an allergy, perhaps the result of breathing in a bit of dust. Most people dismiss a sneeze as an insignificant trifle. This lesson on the Halacha & Hashkafa of the Sneeze was intended to sensitize us to the message of a sneeze. Not necessarily your particular sneeze just now,butthe idea behind the sneeze.

And the sneeze is just an example, an example of all the small things in life that most people take for granted. Those small things are supposed to capture our attention.

The following section in Shulchan Aruch concludes with the challenge to examine everything that happens in this world and see G-d's hand and try to understand His meaning.If one does that, says the Shulchan Aruch, then he is truly a servant of the Creator. This is our goal in life.

LA'BRIYUT (or Livriyut)

It was during a planning session for an NCSY Shabbaton, almost 30 years ago, that someone sneezed. Rabbi G, as busy as we all were, said he had to stop to share a Dvar Torah. 30 years is a long time to remember a Dvar Torah. But when someone's words go down deep, and you internalize them, then they take on extra specialmeaning,and you don't forget them. I hope you get the point because it comes from the very heart and soul of a Torah way of life.

For your information...

The column arrangement in a Sefer Torah is flexible, except that there is a tradition that six specific columns must start with a specific word. (This obviously limits the abovementioned flexibility for the rest of the Torah.) The mnemonic device for remembering the six special columns is "B'KA SH'MO", that's BET, YUD,HEI,SHIN, MEM, VAV. The BET is B'reishit, obviously at the head of a column. The YUD is for Yehuda, as in 49:8. The HEI is the word HA'BA'IM at the top of the Song of the Sea column. The SHIN is in Ki Tisa - SH'MOR L'CHA (Sh'mot 34:11). MEM is MA TOVU in Parshat Balak, and the VAV is the head of the other song column- HA'AZINU.Some of the six column starters have alternate opinions.

A "VAV Sefer Torah" with a VAV starting each column, will have 5 out of its 245 columns not starting with a VAV, as indicated above. The most common Sifrei Torah have 42 lines per column.

Did you realize that...

The book of B'reishit contains:

• 26.2% of the Torah's p'sukim

• 25.8% of its words

• 25.6% of its letters

• and less than 0.5% of the mitzvot.

(Being one of five books, its share on average should be 20%)

B'reishit has 12 sedras, more than each of the other books.

It's 1533 p'sukim, 20,612 words, and 78,064 letters are each the most by far among the five books.

In words and letters per sedra, it is the leader. But in p'sukim per sedra, Bamidbar beats B'reishit for the top honor.

VA'Y'CHI's 4448 letters have a total G'matriya of 286,785. There are almost twice as many SAMACHs than average for the Torah. 50% more PEIs and 30% more YUDs. This fits with a big YOSEF sedra. (There are just about as many VAVs as expected.) HEIs are in short supply - 36.7% below average. All the other letters are within the +/- 20% range.

For the whole book of B'REISHIT, you would expect the frequency of letters to even out. And they mostly do. All letters are within +/- 12%, except for ZAYIN, which is 24% below average, and TET, which is 33% below average.

Still looking for the BIG discoveries.

[sdt] The Baal HaTurim writes that the word EMET (as in Chesed shel Emet - the ultimate kindness shown to the dead) can stand for: ALEF - Aron (coffin), MEM - Mita, the bed upon which the deceased is carried, and and TAV - tachrichim (shrouds). These are three components of Chesed shel EMET..