Special Features Meaning in Mitzvot by Rabbi Asher Meir Each week we will discuss one familiar halakhic practice and try to demonstrate its beauty and meaning. These columns are based on the work “Meaning in Mitzvot”, which is serialized on Yeshivat Har Etzion’s “Virtual Beit Midrash”, www.vbm-torah.org. OVERCHARGING Commercial life involves human interactions as well as material enrichment. Both are important, but which is the means and which the end? Chamor and Shekhem view human interaction as a means to material enrichment. They urge their subjects to befriend Yaakov’s family and allow them to trade (Bereshit 34:21) - but their goal is to become enriched with their possessions (34:23). Yaakov Avinu exhibits the opposite attitude. He too values material possessions - after all, he returns to the camp in the middle of the night merely to retrieve some small jugs (Rashi on 32:25, see Chullin 91a). But the purpose of all his wealth is “To find favor in my lord’s eyes” (33:8) - to increase peace and brotherhood. This distinction is perceptible in the laws of overcharging (onaah). The halakha demands fair dealing with non-Jews as well as Jews, but there is a difference. Regarding commerce with non-Jews, the rule is that we may never cheat or mislead them. (SA CM 228:6, 348:2, and see Be’er HaGolah.) Commerce in the secular culturewe share with non-Jews is mainly a means to the end of the comforts of life, and so such commerce is proper as long as it is honest and productive. However, when dealing with Jews a higher standard applies. Any price which is more than one-sixth away from the going market price is considered unfair, and gives the overcharged customer (or underpaid merchant) the right to annul the sale. (SA CM 227.) Striking a bargain always requires a “meeting of the minds” (da’atmakneh and da’at koneh), but the law of overcharging, onaah, seems to demand an even higher level of mutual understanding. We may explain that in commerce with our fellow Jews, such agreement is an end in itself. Obviously, we Jews have more important things to agree on than the price of trinkets, but it is always important to increase understanding among brothers - even commercial understanding! (Based on Likutei Halakhot Breslav, Laws ofOnaah 2:2.) Viewing commerce as a means to fellowship can help us explain the surprising term the Torah uses to describe overcharging. The word “onaah” usually means “oppression” or “anguishing”. If I seek a fair deal with a merchant and he takes advantage of me, I feel cheated. But if I seek a meaningful relationship with a friendand he takes advantage of me, I feel anguished.
MEANING IN MITZVOT cont. from p.10 An interesting Midrash Halakha parallels this approach. The overcharging prohibition is learned from the verse, “And when you sell to your fellow or buy from your fellow, do not oppress each other”. (Vayikra 25:14.) Rashi, based on Sifra, explains: “How do we learn that when we sell, we should only sell to our fellow Jew?From ‘And when you sell - [sell] to your fellow!’ And how do we learn that when we buy, we should buy only from our fellow Jew? From ‘or buy - from your fellow!’” This Midrash reinforces the message that we perceived in the prohibition on overcharging: that there is a special value in enhancing human contact and understanding among Jews in the marketplace. When commerce exploits human agreements to increase wealth, then both humans and wealth are degraded. But when commerce exploits wealth to increase human understanding, then both are ennobled. This is the Torah ideal. 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 have givien a series on Business Halacha at the Center - is currently giving a weekly shiur at the Israel Center on Tuesday mornings. See BackPage, page II for details.
VAYISHLACH's 7458 letters have a G'matriya of 488815. The sedra is very SAMACH and TET deficient, half as many as average in the Torah. GIMMEL, KAF, and HEI are also under-represented. It is KUF, NUN, AYIN, and VAV heavy. TAV is spelled TAV-VAV, which is 406, the number of TAVs in VAYISHLACH.
G'MATRIYA: Kohelet says: TOVA CHOCHMA MIKLEI KRAV - wisdom is better than weapons. The numeric value of that phrase is 9+6+2+5 (22) + 8+20+40+5 (73) + 40+20+30+10 (100) + 100+200+2 (302) = 497. When Yaakov prepares for his encounter with Eisav, he first says VA'ESHL'CHA L'HAGID LA'ADONI... - sends words of appeasement and gifts to Eisav. 6+1+300+30+8+5 (350) + 30+5+3+10+4 (52) + 30+1+4+50 +10 (95) = 497. Proves the point, numerically, at least.
KOSHER KOLUMN This is part two of last week's Kosher Kolumn on HONEY. Last week's page was emailed from Brooklyn. Due to a slight difference between Dagesh 2000 (on which it was prepared) and Dagesh 2.1 (into which it was downloaded), the last paragraph did not make it into last week's Torah Tidbits. That paragraph read: Let's hold the issues of Royal Jelly and Beeswax for part two of this Kosher Kolumn, which will appear, IY"H next week. Each is its own story, significantly different from honey. Until then... TT reader Jeremy Ottenstein picked up on the omission of the paragraph and emailed the following: "Last week's Kosher Kolumn discussed honey and other bee products. I was a little surprised that royal jelly was not mentioned, especially as I'm under the impression that it's NOT kosher." Good call, J.O. So here is part two. The most important bee in the hive is the Queen Bee. She attains her "royal" status by her constant extra nutritious diet of royal jelly. ROYAL JELLY, a.k.a. Bee's Milk, is a secretion of the bee's hypharyngeal and mandibular glands located in their heads. It is rich in protein, vitamins, fatty acids, and amino acids, and is available in health food stores. It is also a common ingredient in various health food products and remedies. Because it is a YOTZ'EI MIN HATAMEI, an actual product that is secretedfrom the bee, royal jelly should be considered non-Kosher. Worker Feed, a mixture of honey, pollen, and royal jelly should also be considered non-Kosher. There are some rabbis who argue that royal jelly should have the same status as honey, but the OU (and Star-K) aren't buying it. Beeswax, which is used to form the honeycomb in the hive, is secreted from wax glands located on the underside of the abdomen of the bee. Beeswax is sold alone, as well as with honey inside. Beeswax has a surprising Halachic story. In its original state, the human body cannot adequately digest beeswax. It is used in non-food applications, such as candles, lipstick, shoe and floor polish, and buffing wax for surfboards. Since beeswax is not a "food," the fact that it comes from a non-kosher animal (insect) doesnot cause it to be "non-kosher". It is considered kosher, provided that no non-kosher solvents are used, and it contains no non-kosher additives. Although pure beeswax is generally not eaten, its kosher status is important for various reasons. First, beeswax can be extracted to create a chemical used in the flavor industry. Beeswax extract is a kosher chemical (provided that all additives and solvents are approved), since the actual beeswax is not a food. It wouldeven be permissible for one to chew beeswax for its pollen content, or even swallow it, with or without the honey mixed in. Remember, that because of the problem with additives, it is best to look for a reliable Hashgacha on these products.
THE JERUSALEM INSTITUTE OF JEWISH LAW - R. Emanuel Quint, Dean Lesson #16: Emergency Jurisdiction of the Courts (part 2 of 3) In the last lesson, we began a discussion of the emergency or exigency jurisdiction of the Beth Din of non-ordained judges. This became important when the broad Torah-authorized jurisdiction was curtailed due to the lapse of ordination. We showed the Talmudic use of this emergency jurisdiction. We now discuss the post-Talmudicuse of this type of jurisdiction. That is, in case of emergency, the Beth Din may exercise power in matters that they may not do if there is no emergency. Rabbi Asher b. Yehiel (a.k.a. the Rosh, or Asheri, Germany, Spain, 1250-1330) decided the following cases regarding emergency jurisdiction of Beth Din. Rabbi Asher had rendered a decision regarding the erev between courtyards. One member of the town dissented from Rabbi Asher’s ruling. Rabbi Asher instructed the town to excommunicate him and if that did not end the dissension, to ask the secular authorities to fine him one thousand coins, and if he still did not ceasehis dissent, he could be judged like a rebellious elder and be put to death. (Responsum 21, part 9) In another case, Rabbi Asher reached a somewhat different position. In this case, a member of the Jewish community in Cordova was imprisoned by Arabs for not paying a debt and when some of the members of the Jewish community came to visit him in prison, he responded by committing blasphemy. When Rabbi Walker wanted to putthe blasphemer on trial, he fled, was recaptured and finally put on trial. While the trial was going on the relatives of the blasphemer went to the secular Arab authorities and obtained an injunction to stop Rabbi Walker from proceeding with the trial. Rabbi Walker pleaded with the authorities to vacate the injunction;the authorities agreed on condition that Rabbi Asher decide the matter. Rabbi Asher was asked by Rabbi Walker to hurry before the secular authorities changed their mind and reinstated the injunction. Rabbi Asher replied that only in Spain did the Jewish courts have the authority to impose the death penalty, and that hewas surprised by this practice, since the death penalty could not be meted out without a Sanhedrin. But since this became a famous case and the Moslems wanted to see how the Jews handled a case of blasphemy, he instructed Rabbi Walker to mete out any penalty that he deemed fit. (Responsum 17, part 8) In another case sent to Rabbi Asher from the same Rabbi Walker, it seems that a Jewish widow became pregnant by an Arab. Rabbi Walker did not have competent testimony as to who the father was but the people of the community testified that the widow had given most of her property to this Arab and was always seen associatingwith him. When her neighbors noticed that she was pregnant she told them that the Arab was the father. Rabbi Walker told Rabbi Asher that the entire community was waiting for his response and that the surrounding Arab communities were mocking the Jewish community on account of the incident. And there was a danger thatsome of the other Jewish women might take up such conduct unless there was adequate deterrent. Rabbi Walker thought that an appropriate punishment would be to disfigure the widow’s face so that she would no longer be desirable to the Arab. Rabbi Asher answered that Rabbi Walker had judiciously decided the case. (Responsum18, part 13) In another case, a member of a community left the community for a time and when he returned home he was greeted by a tax assessment which he failed to pay. He was jailed and the leaders of the community asked Rabbi Asher if this was a proper procedure. He replied that the leaders of the city had the right to imprison himuntil he paid, or provided a surety or signed a note for the indebtedness. (Responsum 7, part 11) Rabbi Mordechai (T. Shabbat chapter 1, law 248, Germany, 1240-1298) quotes Rabbainu Gershom who decided the following case. Reuven was guilty of purchasing a horse on the Sabbath. Rabbi Gershom ruled that he should be flogged according to Rabbinic law and if the price of the horse rises, the increase in price should betaken from Reuven and given to charity so that a transgressor should not benefit from the transgression. And if the area where the transgression occurred is a place where the people are lax in their Shabbat observance, the Beth Din may impose harsher penalties. About a century later, Menachem of Merseberg (page 178, Saxony, Germany, 1st half of 14th century) was called upon to decide the following case. Isaac beat his pregnant wife with a stick and she died. Witnesses testified that the beating caused wounds, which were not present prior to the beating. His decision was that Isaacshould be beaten and flogged without pity. He was also to be exiled and word of the incident should be published in all communities so that when he was exiled, knowledge of his deed would precede him. About a century later, Rabbi Jacob Weil (Germany d. before 1456) had the following three cases. (1) (Responsum part 2, 58) In Ronswick a person was found guilty of desecrating the Sabbath and Yom Kippur. They inquired of Rabbi Weil if they could punish him by blinding him? He cites two decisions in the Talmud, one where R. Huna ordered the cutting off the hand of a person who was accustomed to strike people (Sanhedrin58b) and in the other where the Exilarch ordered that if a person who was then on trial was found to be guilty of murder he should be blinded (Sanhedrin 27a). Rabbi Weil concludes that they could mete out the punishment of blinding the transgressor. (2) (Responsum part 1, 28) Shimon instituted a lawsuit against Reuven for assaulting him. Witnesses testified that Reuven chased after Shimon for no apparent reason, picked up a piece of lumber, caught up with Shimon and beat Shimon over the head and split Shimon’s skull. There were eyewitnesses to the occurrence and Reuvenalso admitted the assault, but he pleaded that he attacked Shimon because Shimon had just beaten Reuven’s wife. This version was refuted by eyewitnesses who testified that Shimon had struck Reuven’s wife after Reuven had attacked Shimon. Rabbi Weil, in a lengthy reply, concludes that Reuven should seek forgiveness fromShimon, and in addition, he should be fined and flogged. (3) (Responsum part 1, 87) Levi struck Judah on the head. Judah was confined to home for several weeks, after which time he attended a social function. About four weeks after the beating, Judah died. There was competent testimony that the beating was probably not the cause of death and therefore the local Beth Din was ofa mind to exonerate Levi. They sent to Rabbi Weil for his opinion. Rabbi Weil said that assuming that the beating was not the cause of death, nevertheless a beating did take place. He concluded that Levi should accept penance of fasting a certain number of days, pay a monetary fine and be flogged. Rabbi Jacob Reischer (Shevuth Yaakov, part 1, response 136, Prague, 1670-1733) was called upon to decide the following case. There was a problem in one of the communities where a nefarious practice had developed. Almost every bridegroom, soon after the marriage was consummated, lodged a complaint against his bride chargingthat she was unchaste. The accusations were all investigated and proved to be groundless. It soon became obvious that the charges were brought to extort money from the parents of the bride. The leaders of the community desired to make an example of the next bridegroom leveling such a charge so that the practice would nolonger plague the town. Rabbi Reischer responded that there was ample authority for the Beth Din to flog and/or impose a monetary fine on the bridegroom. But that the elders of the town should proceed with due deliberation since the bridegroom is not guilty of violating any specific law. The next lesson continues this discussion.
The Pull-Out we'd rather not The Mishna in Taanit says that we begin asking for rain on the 7th of Cheshvan. If it has not rained by the 17th of the month (ironically, the date that the MABUL began), individuals would take it upon themselves to fast for three days (Monday, Thursday, Monday). If Rosh Chodesh Kislev came, and rain still had not, thenthe Beit Din would declare a set of three fasts. If those fasts (and the prayers accompanying them) pass unanswered, additional, more intense fasting is declared. Many shuls have begun saying the "Prayer for Lack of Rain" which is an insertion into the bracha of SH'MA KOLEINU in the thrice-daily Amida. It is to be said in each person's silent Amida and in the repetition of the Shali'ach Tzibur. On the next page, you will find the prayer within the bracha of Sh'ma Koleinu. You might want to pull the page out of TT and insert it into your Siddur, in the hope and prayer that we will not have to say it for long. The phrases in parentheses are said by those who daven Nusach S'fard. It is difficult to determine when it will be appropriate to stop saying it. We should look to the Chief Rabbinate for guidance in this matter, or the advise of local Rabbanim "in the know". Rabbi Sholom Gold pointed out that the text of this prayer is very similar to the S'faradi "rainy season" version of BAREICH ALEINU. Whereas Ashkenazim add the two words TAL U'MATAR, the S'fardi bracha is quite long. Therefore, we need not "worry" about saying this prayer even as it is being answered with rainfall, IY"H. (In other words, we needn't hesitate and think that maybe our situation isn't THAT bad for us to say VAANEINU BOREI OLAM. It's okay even if we get some rain.)When IY"H we are blessed with abundant, beneficial rain in the next month or so, we will stop adding this prayer. In the meantime, not only should you say it, but put your whole heart into it. We need rain.
Thank You, HaShem... After a period of lack of rain, when we are blessed with beneficial rainfall, it is proper for us to thank G-d for answering our prayers. We do this with a bracha. The bracha is not part of the Amida; it is a stand-alone bracha. It is said when it rains after a too-long period without rain. It would be appropriate for each of us to say it to thank HaShem for rains which follow a dry spell at the time of the year when dry spells are not exactly the best for our water supply and agricultural needs. Saying this bracha does not contradict the saying of the prayer for lack of rain in Sh'ma Koleinu, which we shouldstill be saying until we have had sufficient rainfall. In other words, it is possible to stop saying VA'ANEINU BOREI OLAM and say MODIM in thanks for abundant rainfall. It is also possible to say this thanks-bracha while we continue to say VA"ANEINU. Most of the text of this bracha appears in NISHMAT (Shabbat & Yom Tov Shacharit). It is an elaborate BARUCH HASHEM, said with joy in our hearts. The "fuss" made over rain when we lack it R"L and when we are blessed with it IY"H is verily understandable. We need and depend upon rain. The Torah testifies to this when it describes the Land of Israel as not being like Egypt, but rather it is "a land of hills and valleys and it drinks its water from the rain of the heavens..." Note that our RAIN STATUS is subject to change at a pace that may vary from the weekly publication schedule of Torah Tidbits. As of this moment (when these words are being typed; not when you are reading them), we are feeling the lack of rainfall this season. It wouold be nice that by the time you read these words, MODIMANACHMU LACH would already be able to be said. We'll have to see. It would be very nice to some day soon, to take this page out of your Siddur and put it back into the Torah Tidbits for academic archival purposes only. Let's hope that the more sincere our prayers are, the more beneficial G-d's response will be. [The Vayishlach Homepage]
|
