SHABBAT PARSHAT SH'LACH Halachic Times for Jerusalem
Israel Summer Time In honor of this anniversary
issue, we wanted to add a few new things to Torah Tidbits (with more
to come). Since the second TT, we’ve included candle lighting and
Havdala times for Jerusalem. As of TT 573, we have included times
for the top 12 TT locations. It wasn’t easy and it needs polish. We
reached some of the MO’EITZA DATIT offices to check on the local
minhag for candle lighting. Petach Tikva, for example, holds the
same 40 minutes before sunset as does Jerusalem. Some people in Beit
Shemesh also hold 40 minutes, but many (most?) hold only 20. Be’er
Sheva holds 25 minutes before sunset and Tzfat holds 30. The rest
are cal- culated using 20-22 minutes. We ask readers to contact us
with comments and suggestions. Earliest times are based on PLAG,
same calculation for all places. Havdala is also standard. Rabbeinu
Tam time is listed only for Jerusalem, as are the other Z’manim of
the day. Sunset, on the other hand, is given for an elevation of 825m and, in parentheses, as if at sea level. There are different opinions as to which sunset time should be used for halachic purposes. We present both times. The deadlines for the SH'MA and the Shacharit Amida can be calculated in two ways. Either considering the day to be from sunrise to sunset or from dawn to stars out. The first way of reckoning is known as the opinion of the GR"A, and is the first time given in each case. The second method is known as the Magen Avraham, and is presented in parentheses. Aside from candle lighting and havdala, the times are presented as a range, from the current Thursday of the issue of Torah Tidbits until the coming Thursday, a span of 8 days. Days between the two Thursdays can be determined by interpolation (which means: a method by which to estimate a value of between two known values - this is something that people above a certain age might remember from high school trigonometry and logarithms, but younger people who went to school during the calculator era might not be familiar with). It is usually wise to "pad" the
times with a minute or two in the "play it safe" direction. E.g.
Plag Mincha. Better to finish Mincha a minute or two before the
given time. But, better to not light candles until a minute or two
after the given time. 20 Sivan was almost fixed in our
calendar as a Public Fast Day. It just missed, so to speak, on some
technicalities, but it is a serious day of which to take note. In
4931 (1171ce), Rabbeinu Tam and the Sages of France declared 20
Sivan as a Fast Day, because of events that occurred during the
Crusades and because of particularly “spectacular”blood libel that
happened on the day itself. Centuries later, the massacres of tens
of thousands of Jews and the destruction of hundreds of Jewish
communities in Poland and the Ukraine at the hands of Chmelnicki and
his hordes (1648-49, TACH V’TAT), were added to the tragedies 20
Sivan marked. In our own time, the date picked up another black mark
- the most costly battle of Operation Sh’lom HaGalil, the Battle of
Sultan Yakub, took place on 20 Sivan 5752. Among others, Yair Landau
HY"D (for whom the Israel Center's library was named) was killed,
and several IDF soldiers were captured, including Zacharia Baumel.
Let’s apply this idea to the beginning of this week’s sedra. Before we do, let’s suggest how three different Jews should react to the words that follow. [1] Jews who live in Eretz Yisrael and are ideologically committed to living in Eretz Yisrael should take the coming words as CHIZUK, intended to strengthen your commitment AND to give you something to share with friends and family who don’t yet live here. [2] Jews who don’t yet live in Israel, but want to. Really want to. Believe that this is where Jews should live. But they don’t yet. For you, these words should be IDUD, encouragement. Encouragement to maybe speed up your Aliya plans. At least to meet with good Aliya counselors, talk things over with your children, get a little closer to actualizing what you already believe is the right thing to do. [3] Jews who live in Chutz LaAretz and think that they have everything they need for a complete Jewish life in whatever wonderful Jewish community they live in. The Jews who think those of us who made Aliya are crazy. The ones who think that Israel is a nice place to visit, but who would want to live here. For you, these words are TOCHACHA, reproach, offered lovingly to fellow Jews, with a heartfelt plea not to behave like the Meraglim in the sedra, nor like the people who panicked when they heard the Meraglim talk, nor like the ones who wanted to stone Kalev and Yehoshua, Moshe and Aharon. The Meraglim of 3314 years ago, and the Meraglim of today say the same things, with slightly different words. We might even suggest - as long
as we’re in the CHIZUK, IDUD, and HOCHACHA modes (as mentioned
above), that we today find ourselves in the same position as Bnei
Yisrael on that fateful first Tish’a b’Av and face the possibilities
of repeating the same mistakes, or getting it right this time. With
the stakes on both sides higher than way back then. If we repeat the
same mistakes, then perhaps our transgression will be considered
even worse than that generation, because we know what happened that
first time, and countless times since. Therefore we are forewarned
more than DOR HAMIDBAR was. And if we respond in the right way, we
will not only be doing what G-d wants of us, but we will hopefully
repair the damage of the past. The choice, as it always has been, is
ours. [SDT] The L'CHA of Lech L'cha (way back with Avraham), we are taught, means, "for your benefit". You are not going just because I command, but it is to your advantage to go. The KLI YAKAR suggests a similar meaning of the L'CHA in Sh'lach L'cha. How can we say that the sending of the Meraglim was to anyone's benefit? The result of the Meraglim was that Moshe's life was prolonged by 40 years. The representatives of each tribe are named and the Torah, further testifies to the high caliber of each man. [SDT] Back in Bamidbar, when the Tribal leaders were named, both Efrayim and Menashe were identified as the sons of Yosef - both within the same pasuk. Here, only Menashe is identified with Yosef, and Efrayim's scout - Yehoshua - is listed 3 p'sukim earlier, without reference to Yosef. Commentaries note that Yosef had been involved in "negative reports" against his brothers, as was the scout of Menashe, Gadi b. Susi. Yehoshua, of course, remained clear of the taint of DIBA RA'A and is therefore not mentioned together with Yosef, in this context. And Moshe called Hoshea bin Nun, Yehoshua. [SDT] Rashi says that by adding a YUD to Hoshea's name, he was giving him a bracha that he should be saved from the group decision of the other Meraglim. Question: MIMA NAFSHACH (whichever way you want to look at the situation) - Why did Moshe not “bless” the others scouts similarly? And why would Yehoshua need a bracha when Kalev apparently did not? Whether a Scout will come back with the proper attitude or not was based on each individual's personality, perceptions, and conclusions. That was up to each of the 12 individuals. That's not why Moshe gave a special bracha to Yehoshua. Moshe had a separate fear concerning Yehoshua. He could imagine Yehoshua joining the ten Meraglim in discouraging the People from entering the Land so that Moshe's life would be prolonged. Eldad and Meidad had prophesied that Moshe would die and Yehoshua would lead the people into the Land, and Yehoshua heard that. Moshe's bracha to Yehoshua was to keep Yehoshua honest, so to speak, so that he would not join the "evil advice" for any reason, even one to benefit Moshe himself. Moshe gives the scouts instructions and an itinerary, hoping that they will return with an encouraging report for Bnei Yisrael. It was the time of the ripening of the grapes, Bikurei Anavim. A little over 11 years ago, the then director of the Israel Center, Shai Solomon, suggested that we print up a schedule of activities and distribute them in shuls with significant numbers of English-speakers, so that we would be able to reach more people than those who came into the Center to pick up flyers or saw our announcements in In Jerusalem. The suggestion did not sit well with me, at first. I was uncomfortable with giving out “flyers” for weekday activities in shuls on Shabbat. After expressing my reservations, I offered to put a Dvar Torah on the other side of the paper with our schedule. That would make it more appropriate for Shabbat and shul distribution. And so, the latest form of Torah Tidbits was born. (Some other time, we’ll tell you of the three former incarnations of Torah Tidbits.) That very first TT was photocopied on pale yellow paper 60 times, on Friday afternoon, and given out in two shul that Shabbat, Parshat Sh’lach, June 20th, 1992. At the time, we had a photo- copier that did two-color copying, so the banner across the topic that carried the OU Israel Center logo and the first version of the TT logo was in red, and the rest of the page was in black. We were using a dot-matrix printer in those days (remember them?) and the print was crude, as was the distorted graphic of the two spies carrying a large cluster of grapes. Two weeks later, we started folding the one sheet of paper to form a 4-page TT. We’ll spare you the rest of the details (at this time), but we will share with you that first Dvar Torah, especially because it is a beautiful and important idea, and because it exemplifies one of the main messages that TT has tried to convey to its readership over the years. The basis of this “tidbit” is a Dvar Torah found in MAAYANA SHEL TORAH. We’ve added to it over the years since TT #1. On the description of the time
that Moshe sent the scouts as being, Y’MEI BIKUREI ANAVIM, the ARI
Z”L states that the mitzva of BIKURIM (firstfruits) is a TIKUN
(combination repair, atone- ment, and “let’s do it right this time”)
for the Sin of the Spies. “These (refering to the “scouts”, not
including Yehoshua and Kalev) vilified the Land, and, in contrast,
the mitzva of Bikurim was given because of love of the Land”. The
Meraglim brought fruits of Eretz Yisrael and used them to frighten
and discourage the People. The Bikurim bringer uses the fruits of
Eretz Yisrael as a joyful and thankful expression of love of Eretz
Yisrael. (This is a reason for Bikurim coming only from the Seven
Species that are associated with the description of the beauties of
the Land.) Furthermore, the Meraglim SPOKE against the Land; the
Bikurim bringer SPEAKS in grateful acknowledgement of G-d’s bringing
us to the Land of Israel. This aspect of WORDS makes the connection
and contrast between the Sin of the Meraglim and the mitzva of
Bikurim very strong. Maayana Shel Torah con- tinues with a comment
of HaRav Menachem Zemba, HY”D (one of the leading rabbis in the
Warsaw ghetto; he perished during the uprising). Rav Zemba observed
that the Mishna in Bikurim that describes the process of the mitzva,
gives examples of a person going into his field and seeing a fig
ripening, a cluster of grapes ripening, a pomegranate ripening...
The Mishna names three of the seven species - the very same species
that the Meraglim brought back with them. This serves as a sharp
demonstration of the words of the ARI Z”L. Kalev silenced the people and tells them that they should go to the Land; "we can do it!". The other ten scouts objected and spoke against the Land, causing widespread panic among the people. Moshe, Aharon, Kalev, and Yehoshua are greatly troubled by the words of the Meraglim and by the reaction of the people. Kalev and Yehoshua proclaim the goodness of the Land. [SDT] ...and we were in our eyes like grasshoppers (compared to the giants of Canaan) and so we appeared to them. The Kotzker Rebbe and others define two components of the Sin of the Spies from this part of the pasuk. First, that we saw ourselves as small and insignificant, com- pared with the nations in Eretz Yisrael. Second, that we were concerned about how others perceived us. With G-d obviously on our side (we know what happened to Egypt and we witnessed so many miracles performed on our behalf), we should not have viewed ourselves that way. And, how others perceive us is their problem, not ours. [SDT] Rashi says that when the Meraglim stressed how strong the people in K'na'an were, they were including an insult to G-d as well, as if to say, they are stronger even than G-d. Notice how the first time the Meraglim spoke to the people, they did not say that we shouldn’t go into Eretz Yisrael. They “just” described some of the dif- ficlties we would face and apparently hoped that their report would scare off the people. After Kalev took the micro- phone, so to speak, and gave a brief but enthusiastic “Aliya pep-talk”, the Meraglim dropped the subtle approach and spoke out openly against going into Eretz Yisrael. This is what the Torah described as DIBA RA’A AL HA- ARETZ, Lashon HaRa, if you will, against the Land. It might be said that people who
tell other Jews about terror attacks and other difficulties that we
face in Israel are “guilty” of “first-stage” Meraglim- talk. Those
who add “you gotta be crazy to live there” or words to that effect,
are repeating and perpetuating what is maybe the greatest communal
sin in the history of the Jewish People. The sin of the Meraglim
created the blackest day on our calendar, Tish’a b’Av. The
destructions of the two Batei Mikdash and the various causes of the
CHURBAN were “merely” add-ons to Tish’a b’Av. When we totally
repudiate - by action, not just by word - the Sin of the Spies, and
embrace - by action, not just by word - the righteous behavior of
Kalev and Yehoshua, then we can hope for the fulfillment of the
prophecy of Zecharya that will see Tish’a b’Av and the other Churban-
related fasts become YAMIM TOVIM. [P>] G-d is "angered" by the people and "suggests" to Moshe that He will destroy them. Moshe argues on behalf of the people. His (main) argument is that other nations will say that G-d did not have the ability to bring Bnei Yisrael into K'na'an, so He killed them in the wilderness. This would be a Chilul HaShem. Moshe then invokes a modified version of the Divine Attributes and pleads for forgiveness for the people. (Part of Moshe's words at this point have been incorporated into our davening.) G-d agrees to Moshe's pleas. (G-d's response to Moshe also becomes part of the Yom Kippur davening.) G-d declares that this is the tenth time that the People have "tested" His patience (so to speak). He promises that the men of this generation will not enter the Land - except for Kalev (and Yehoshua). The People are told that Amalek and the Canaanites occupy the valley and that they (the People of Israel) will have to divert towards the Midbar. [<P] Compare and Learn There is more to this than "simply" two examples of Lashon HaRa, one about a person and one about Eretz Yisrael. There are important elements and details to be learned one from the other. For example, it is not just the speaker of Lashon HaRa that transgresses. Those who listen to LH passively, without objecting, those who accept the LH as truth - they too transgress. The Sin of the Spies was not restricted to 10 people. Thousands of those who heard what was said and accepted it, and panicked because of it, they too were guilty. And they were punished, as we know. Translate this into our time. It is not enough for one to refrain from bad- mouthing Eretz Yisrael, one cannot stand by idly when others do it. Kalev jumped up as soon as he heard what the Meraglim said. He did his best to repudiate the words of the Meraglim and then made his own impassioned pitch for Aliya. We must not "put down" Israel, its people, life here, etc. We must object when others do. And One should be avoid saying something negative even in a joke. It would at least be AVAK LASHON HARA. One commentary turns the question of juxtaposition around. Something has to follow something else in the Torah. Going to ask about every two
things that come together? He answers based on the explanation of
the function of the parsha that is bracketed with the backwards NUNs
(in last week’s sedra). It was to separate between tragic episodes.
If so, then why not separate between the episode of Miriam and that
of the Spies? Answer: To make the point. Clarification: The people deeply regret their
behavior and now plan to enter the Land immediately. Moshe warns
them not to, because G-d no longer wants them to do so (at this
point). Some of the people went anyway - without the protection of
the Aron, so to speak - and are defeated and repelled by Amalek and
K'na'an. [<P] It is important to note the
context of these laws. Right after being told that the older
generation (males) will not enter the Land, G-d comforts the people
by teaching procedures that will apply in Eretz Yisrael,
specifically mitzvot that are to be "pleasing to G-d". It is as if
G-d says, "Don't be too dismayed; your children will live in Eretz
Yisrael and will serve Me in the Beit HaMikdash" in this special
way. Rashi points out that the Hebrew
word SEH (spelled SIN-HEI) refers generically to the young of both
sheep and goat. Similarly, back in Parshat Bo, the Korban Pesach is
to be a SEH, and both lamb and kid are specified. Although many
people think "lamb” when Korban Pesach is mentioned, a male goat
within its first year is equally valid. (G’DI, by the way, is
similarly generic. Although many people translate the well-known
pasuk about meat in milk as Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its
mother’s milk, the more accurate translation would be, “a young
animal”. In any case, the Oral Law is necessary to clarify words and
terms used in the Written Word. MITZVA WATCH It is performed with the essential food of humans - Bread, the staff of life. This elevates the mundane physical necessity of food to a spiritual level. Secondly, the fact that we are to give Challah to a Kohen - specifically after most of the work has been done, meaning that we give Challah from the ready-to-pop-into-the-oven dough rather than the raw produce of other gifts to the Kohen - indicates that it is not merely the gift that is significant, but the service to the Kohen that we perform that is important as well. Challah is one of the Mitzvot that our Sages have kept active by rabbinic decree since the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash, so that its practice and lessons should not be lost to us. Furthermore, Challah is rabbinically required in Chutz LaAretz, even though the Torah introduces the mitzva with, "with your coming to the Land". This too helps keep Torat Challah alive among the Jewish People. Often, reciting and learning appropriate Torah passages is sufficient to remember a "suspended" mitzva. Not with this one. Actual performance of the mitzva continues. [S>] Next the Torah presents the
details of the Chatat (sin offering) of the community (in cases
where the leaders of the community inadvertently misled the people
(in Avoda Zara related matters.) Here again it seems obvious that
this topic is brought up because of the context of the Sin of the
Spies. This mitzva is not counted here, but it certainly conveys G-d's
attitude (so to speak) about Cheit HaMeraglim. We recognize that
sometimes our leaders must bear the responsibility of leading us
astray (but not always - often we must be accountable and not claim
that we were just following orders). The ideas (and text) of this
portion form part of our Yom Kippur service. [<S] Following Cheit HaMeraglim and preceding the episode of the wood- gatherer, the Torah presents us with both types of Chata’ot - communal and individual. These topics are dealt with (and counted among Taryag) else- where. Maybe the Torah puts them here to increase their message-value. [P>] The Torah next tells us of
the woodgatherer (Tradition identifies him as Zelafchad) who was
locked up pending details from G-d as to how a public desecrator of
Shabbat is to be executed. (That it is a capital offense was already
known.) [<PS>] G-d's command was to stone the violator. And so it
was done. [<S] Our Sages went out of their way, so to speak, to involve us in the mitzva of Tzitzit - with Talit Gadol and Talit Katan - although we could technically not be required to fulfill this mitzva because our regular clothing do not usually have four corners. Perhaps they did so because Tzitzit is not merely a mitzva that we "perform", it is a mitzva that we wear. It is an integral part of our everyday lives. What a shame to be without this inspirational mitzva because the style of clothing has changed and we no longer wear four-cornered garments. Furthermore, the Torah links the
mitzva of tzitzit with all the mitzvot of the Torah; tzitzit serve
as a reminder of the Jew's all-encompassing commitment to G-d. This
is followed by the warning not to follow the evil temptation of the
eye (mind) or heart (emotion) [387, L47]. The Torah then reiterates
the importance of belief in G-d in general, and in His having
redeemed us from Egypt, in particular. Thus, the twice daily
recitation of the Sh'ma constitutes the fulfillment of the mitzva to
remember the Exodus "all the days of your life", in addition to its
own mitzva, the recitation of the Sh'ma. It follows that when one
recites the Sh’ma, one should have specific KAVANA at the end of the
third passage to fulfill the mitzva to remember the Exodus all the
days of our lives. The last 5 p'sukim, are reread for the Maftir.
[<P] The laws of this section apply only if the buyer knows that the seller is not a merchant and is selling his personal items (such as a "garage sale"), as distinguished from selling inventory merchandise that he holds for sale. If the non-merchant seller sells through a broker, the laws of discrepancy in price do apply even if the buyer knows that the seller is a non-merchant. If the buyer purchases through a broker, even though the buyer knew that the seller was a non- merchant, the laws of discrepancy in price do apply. All that is said about the benefiting party making restitution to the wronged party and the wronged party having the right to rescind the sale does not apply if the wronged party is a Gentile. However, if the Gentile is the benefiting party, he is subject to the same laws as a Jew. Assume that a Jew and Gentile are joint sellers and the sale involves discrepancy in price in favor of the seller to the extent of one-sixth of the normal market price. Assume that the Gentile cannot be held liable for the discrepancy in price in a Gentile court. The Jew must pay the entire discrepancy in price to the buyer. However, if the Gentile would have been liable in the Gentile courts to pay his share of the discrepancy in price and he fails to pay, and if the wronged party is intimidated not to sue him in the Gentile court, the benefiting Jewish seller need only pay his share of the discrepancy in price. Assume that the seller makes full disclosure of the price he paid for the item he is selling and the profit he is making. Then if the buyer purchases the item, the laws of discrepancy in price do not apply. Conversely, if it is discovered that the normal market price is much higher and the buyer has a windfall, the seller cannot take advantage of the discrepancy-in-price laws. The buyer tells the seller that he will pay him the seller's cost plus a fixed amount or percentage. The laws of discrepancy in price do not apply. In all of these situations where the laws of discrepancy in price regarding price do not apply, if there is a discrepancy in the quality of the thing sold, the wronged party may raise such an issue to void the sale. The law is similar when a buyer, who may or may not be a merchant, deals with a middleman who purchases goods from manufacturers, or with wholesale farmers or other similar sellers to middle- men. The buyer pays the middleman a fixed percentage of the price that he paid to his supplier. The laws of discrepancy in price do not apply since the middleman's fee is fixed and he does not set the price. This holds true whether the middleman bought the goods from his supplier prior to receiving an order from the buyer or subsequent thereto. If the owner of the goods instructs the middleman to sell the goods at the best price that he can obtain and agrees that after he sells them he will pay the middleman, the owner cannot complain that the middleman owes him payment on the basis of discrepancy in price because he did not obtain a good price. If the middleman knows that the base price prior to his commission is violative of the laws of discrepancy in price, he should not stock or sell such merchandise. The halachah admonishes the middleman to seek the best price and best-quality goods on behalf of his ultimate customers as if he were the ultimate customer. A seller who makes full
disclosure may, under certain circumstances, be violating the laws
of discrepancy in price. For example, the middleman purchases ten
watches for $100, which averages out to $10 a watch. But not all the
watches are of the same quality. Assume that the middle- man works
on a five percent commission, which averages out to $.50 a watch.
The watches should therefore sell to the middleman's customers at
$10.50 for every watch. However, the customer who pays $10.50 for a
poor-quality watch may be a wronged party under the laws of
discrepancy in price. If the middleman sells while relying on the
full-disclosure excep- tion to the rules of discrepancy in price, he
must sell all his stock to one person so that the better-quality
watches and the poorer- quality watches will average themselves out.
If he does not sell them all to one person, the buyer who purchases
a poorer-quality watch for $10.50 may have a claim against the
middleman. As seen from the aforestated
lessons, the laws of these lessons do not apply to the following
situations: to sales where the seller knows the precise price and the buyer does not know the precise price; or the buyer knows the precise price and the seller does not. (The wronged party may rescind the sale for any discrepancy in price, no matter how small.) if the seller sells the item because he was under financial pressure to sell, or sells the item as a "loss leader" to draw customers into his store. Or similarly, if the buyer has a great need for the item and deliberately overpays. Neither party can sue for the discrepancy in price, no matter how large. to the sale of real estate or notes of indebtedness. There is also authority that holds that the laws of discrepancy in price do apply. The subject matter of this lesson
is more fully presented in Volume VII Chapters 227 of"A Restatement
of Rabbinic Civil Law" bE. Quint, published by Jason Aronson, Inc.
and on sale at local Judaica bookstores. • Questions to quint@inter.net.il Two significant attributes of
agency are: It is obvious that a person can have another person perform a physical action on his behalf, like hiring a worker to plow a field or paint a house. But it is a bit surprising that someone can actually delegate his unique personal ability to make decisions and to effect legal agreements to someone else. After all, if we are taking about a mitzvah, we know that these require the specific intention (kavanah) of the mitzvah-doer (SA OC 60:4); if we are talking about a commercial trans- actions, the validity of these trans- actions is based on a "meeting of the minds" How can the principal (the sender) provide intention or agreement when he is not even present? And why is this ability lacking if the agent is a non-Jew? Rebbe Natan of Breslav has a unique and compelling explanation for this ability. He explains that ultimately, even the power of the individual to make his own decisions is really a kind of agency from the Creator. After all, we are not placed here on earth to pursue our own vain desires, but rather to carry out HaShem's will. Of course He is capable of carrying out whatever He desires, but He chose to create human beings in His own image and to give us free will, at the same time instructing us to use this will an an extension and fulfillment of the Divine will. So all of our acts of will are meant to be in the service or agency of G-d. In the plan of Divine Providence, each of us has our own unique mission which we need to carry out using our will and our judgment. So it is still true that "the mitzvah is greater when done by him than when done by his agent". But ultimately, this mission is that of carrying out G-d's plan, which all members of His people are equally charged with fulfilling. So a person's agent is indeed, like himself, a representative of the Creator who is authorized and charged by Him (Likutei Halakhot Breslav, laws of agency 2). This approach explains the remarkable prevalence of agency regarding the performance of mitzvot. The acts that most prominently express our adherence to HaShem's will are of course are fulfillment of the commandments of His Torah. This approach also makes it obvious why there is no agency regarding a transgression: even the principal (the sender) would not be fulfilling the will of G-d by carrying out a transgression; it follows that the agent lacks the power to act on behalf of the principal in transgressing, since there is no longer a chain which extends from G-d's will, which is the ultimate source of the power of agency. (Indeed, there is an opinion in the gemara which states that any act done in transgression of the Torah lacks legal force, even if not performed by an agent (Temurah 4b). We can also understand why non-Jews are not valid as agents; they are not commanded in the mitzvot of the Torah and therefore are not completely "deputized" to carry out His will in all of its expressions. (Of course all human beings are created in G-d's image and are obligated to use their free will to fulfill His will; the difference is in the extent of the authority and obligation.) A most remarkable aspect of this
explanation is that the effectiveness of agency in commercial
transactions is attributed to this same mechanism. “Meaning in Mitzvot” is now undergoing intensive editing; which will be followed IYH by printing. With the help of loyal supporters, we hope to have the book on the shelves by Rosh HaShana. If you would be interested in helping with publication, please contact Rabbi Meir about making a dedication or subscription (advance purchase): email mail@asherandattara.com, fax 02-642-3141. Rabbi Meir authors a popular
weekly on-line Q&A column, "The Jewish Ethicist", which gives Jewish
guidance on everyday ethical dilemmas in the workplace. The column
is a joint project of the JCT Center for Business Ethics, Jerusalem
College of Technology - Machon Lev; and Aish HaTorah. You can see
the Jewish Ethicist, and submit your own Qs — www.jewishethicist.com
or www. aish.com Q I am a student who sold a product to friends on behalf of a business- man for a percentage of the sales. I mentioned to the owner my concern about a safe place to keep the sales money until I would find time to give him the money, but we decided it would be okay. I thought that if something happened to the money, it would be his loss. It turns out that a significant amount of the money was stolen, and the owner expects me to pay. I told him that I didn't think I had to pay, and that we could go to a Din Torah (rabbinical court case). Then the idea arose that instead of having a din Torah, we would make a p'shara (compromise). Which way am I better off? A First of all, we have a problem giving advice on how you can come out monetarily ahead at someone else's expense. The mishna in Pirkei Avot warns us to avoid being like orchei hadayanim (translated, in modern Hebrew as, lawyers). While there are different opinions exactly when this applies (see Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 17:9), our policy, as a service dedicated to helping Jews further their Jewish knowledge and appreciation, is to not take sides in disputes between litigants, as honorable as either side might be. The next thing you need to understand is what "I am better off" should mean. While society, in general, concentrates on how to get every penny one can, the Torah teaches that it is at least as important to pay every penny you owe. Now it is true that when one is not sure if he owes money, the halacha often is, "the burden of proof is on he who wants to extract money," and the "one who is holding on" doesn't need to volunteer the money. However, if the defendant knows he owes the money, he is obligated to pay everything he owes unless the other side relinquishes his rights. P'shara, whether by means of arbitration or mediation, is the best way to solve a conflict (see Choshen Mishpat 12). Even a Beit Din which is approached to adjudicate should try to convince the parties to agree to a compromise (ibid.). However, that is the case as long as the litigants believe that they are, or are likely, to be correct. The Shulchan Aruch (CM 12:6) rules: "Someone who is demanded to pay money is forbidden to search for means to get out of paying in order that the other party will make a p'shara with him and relinquish his rights to the rest of the money." Realize that if you want us to look into the facts, as you present them, that we cannot assure you that you deserve to win the case, as we do not know what the other party would respond to your claims. But we might be able to deter- mine that, according to your story, you clearly do not deserve to win all or part of the money in dispute. Then you would be bound to pay what you owe, and a p'shara would only be possible within the range of the money that is still in doubt. You would have a responsibility to inform the other side how much you concede, in order that any money he relinquishes through compromise would be based on informed consent, not ignorance. The following are exceptions to the rule that you must willingly pay that which Beit Din would require you to pay. If you are correct, in principle, but are unable to prove your claims, then you could take certain steps to pressure the other side to a p'shara rather than lose the Din Torah (Tumim 12:5). Other circumstances and steps are discussed (see Pitchei Teshuva 12:8), but are more tenuous. You are permitted to tell the other side that, although halachically you have to pay (if that is the case), you have claims that strengthen your side morally, and you can appeal to your counterpart's sense of fair play to go beyond the letter of the law. (This can be done even after a formal verdict of Beit Din has been handed down (see Shach 12:6). Outcome: The student requested that we try to determine his status. Based on his story alone, he was seen to owe at least most of the money [details beyond our present scope]. He informed the other side and appealed to him with a variety of claims, and they reached a gentle- manly compromise somewhere in the middle, to the satisfaction of each. Ask the Rabbi Q&A is part of
Hemdat Yamim, the weekly parsha sheet published by Eretz Hemdah. You
can read this section or the entire Hemdat Yamim at www.ou.org or
www.eretzhemdah.org. And/or you can receive Hemdat Yamim by email
weekly, by sending an email to eretzhem@netvision.net.il with the
message: Join Hemdatya –Please leave the subject blank. Ask the
Vebbe Rebbe is partially funded by the Jewish Agency for Israel This reveals a profound
psychological truth. We see what our minds con- dition us to see, or
simply, we see what our thoughts make us see. The Rohrshach test of
psychologists is based on this truth. Some nebulous shape attains a
certain configuration because of the way we think. Our thoughts
shape our observations. TORAH THOUGHTS as contributed by
Aloh Naaleh members for publication in the Orthodox Union's 'Torah
Insights', a weekly Torah publication on Parshat Ha'Shavuah For we surely recoil when we read: "How long will this people provoke me…? I will smite them…and annihilate them" (Bemidbar 14:11-12). And, cognizant of this alarming potentiality, we ask for what are we being punished, as we count the ever-increasing number of terror victims in our midst. We must thus take comfort from Moshe's poignant plea (ibid. 13-21) in which he successfully argues that the nations of the world will only scoff at G-d if the people are destroyed. More powerfully, Moshe invokes the Attributes of Hashem, entreating G-d to let "Slowness of anger" prevail over "Strict justice" - to let patience prevail over punishment (Rashi). Because the people were
unrepentant, Moshe could not invoke all the characteristics of the
Thirteen Attributes (Shemot 34:6-7). But we, today, can cry to G-d
that if we have sinned we are repentant. We can then appeal to
Hashem's attributes of Compassion and Truth. We can exclaim "Ve'ata
Hashem Ad Matai?" - 'And You, O Lord, how much longer?' (Tehilim
6:4) - while committing ourselves to renounce forever those who
slander Eretz Yisrael. Reishit HaGeiz - The First of
the Shearing The Rambam comments, "The Kohein was privileged to be given Terumot by the Holy One Blessed be He for his bread and wine, Matanot of animals and predesignated portions of the Korbanot for his meat and Reishit HaGeiz (to provide wool) for his clothing…" (Hilchot Bikurim 10:5). The sheep-shearing season in Eretz Yisrael is in the spring. The country is green, the winter rains have already stopped and the nights are no longer cold. The source of the Mitzva of Reishit HaGeiz is Devarim 18:4, "…the first of the shearing of your flock you shall give to him (the Kohein)." The Mishna explains, "The law of Reishit HaGeiz is applicable both within the Land (of Israel) and outside of the Land, when the Beit HaMikdash is standing and when the Beit HaMikdash is no longer standing, for unconsecrated animals, but not for animals consecrated (as Korbanot or to the Mikdash)" (Chulin 11:1). Here we have one of those fascinating and highly unusual cases when a Baraita (a tradition of the Tana'im not included in our Mishna) is accepted as the normative halacha and what is recorded in our Mishna is not! The Baraita reads, "R. Ila'i says, 'The laws pertaining to Terumah are applicable only in the Land (of Israel). Similarly, R. Ila'i used to say, 'The halacha of Reishit HaGeiz applies only in the Land.'" What is R. Ila'i's reason? He draws a verbal analogy between the expression "Netina” (giving) quoted in the relevant p’sukim in both cases, Terumah and Reishit HaGeiz. By using this verbal analogy, he postulates, "Just as Terumah is obligatory only in the Land, so Reishit HaGeiz is obligatory only in the Land" (Hullin 136a - see bottom of 135a for an examination of the textual basis of R. Ila'i's thinking). The Gemara concludes, "R. Nachman b. Yitzchak said, 'Nowadays, the world has accepted the views of the following three elders, R. Ila'i with regard to Reishit HaGeiz…" And, in fact, in contradistinction to our Mishna but according to the Baraita, the Rambam rules, "Reishit HaGeiz is observed only in the Land." The Rambam further notes, "There is no “shi'ur” (specified amount) ordained in the Torah for Reishit HaGeiz." Quoting the Amora'im Rav and Shmuel, he continues, "The proper measure for Reishit HaGeiz is one sixtieth part (of the cut wool)." "'Reishit HaGeiz applies only to the wool of sheep.' From where do we derive this? We can infer it by means of a verbal analogy; the use of word Giza (fleece or wool) in two separate cases. It is written here, 'Reishit HaGeiz - the first of the fleece (without noting the fleece of which animal) - and elsewhere it is written, ‘And if he were not warmed by the fleece of my sheep’ (Iyov - Job 31:20)'." Since the pasuk in Iyov distinctly mentions the fleece of sheep, we may infer that the pasuk referring to Reishit HaGeiz, also refers to the wool of sheep, even though it does not specifically say so (Chullin 137a). The halacha of Reishit HaGeiz applies to both male and female sheep and it applies only when there were "many" sheep. Question. What is the minimum number of sheep necessary to be considered "many" and therefore subject to Reishit HaGeiz? "The Sages say, 'Five sheep whatever their wool weighs. And how much wool (the minimum amount) should they give to the Kohein? The weight of five Sela'im in Yehuda which is equivalent to ten Sela'im in the Galil (A "Judean" Sela is roughly 19 grams). It should be bleached wool, not dirty wool. It should be enough to make a small garment as it is written, 'You shall give to him. - There should be enough (wool) to count as a worthy gift…" (Chullin 11:2). If the farmer had a large quantity of wool, he could give Reishit HaGeiz to many Kohanim as long as each Kohein received at least the minimum amount. Rough wool, which was "hard" and unsuitable to be made into clothing, was exempt from the Mitzva because, as the Rambam notes, "This Matana was given to the Kohein for the express purpose of making clothing." Beit Hillel derived the number of five sheep from I Shmuel 25:18 where the pasuk refers to "five sheep ready dressed". R. Ashi pictures the sheep rousing their owner, "Get up and perform the Mitzva!" Which Mitzva were the sheep referring to? Reishit HaGeiz! R. Akiva concurs that five sheep is indeed the minimum number subject to the halacha of Reishit HaGeiz, but he derives the number from the pasuk in the Torah actually ordaining the Mitzvah itself, "...the first of the shearing of your flock you shall give to him." i.e. 'first of the shearing', two sheep, 'your flock', another two, 'you shall give to him', one more sheep - five sheep all told." If the farmer set aside wool for Reishit HaGeiz, and it was lost or destroyed before the Kohein took delivery, the farmer was held responsible and he had to set aside more wool to fulfill the mitzva. The Maharam ("Ta'amei Masoret Hamikra" by R. Mier b. R. Boruch MeRottenburg) emphasizes the importance of presenting the Kohein with top quality clean wool. He interprets Tehilim 72:6 in a manner different from most authorities. While the Targum, Rashi, and Metzudat David translate "Geiz" as cut grass or plants, ("May he (the righteous king) descend like rain on the cut grass…") the Maharam derives an entirely different lesson from the pasuk. Unlike the other parshanim (commentaries), he perceives the word Geiz in this pasuk as not necessarily meaning cut vegetation: it also pertains to Reishit HaGeiz! Quoting the Sifri, he comments, "The wool must be washed very well before it is presented to the Kohein, just like rain falling upon fleece causes it to be white and sparkle like the rain." Reishit HaGeiz is one of the Matanot given to the Kohein which is applicable and observed in Eretz Yisrael even today. True, nowadays, not many Jews own sheep; nevertheless, sometimes we hear about unique celebrations in some Moshav or another. We city slickers can only smile in appreciation when we read in the paper how a Yisrael ceremoniously sheared his sheep and, with the unique joy a Jew experiences when he fulfills an unusual Mitzva, presented Reishit HaGeiz to a Kohein. And we are slightly taken aback when we hear about the strange (to us) Beracha recited at the Simcha: "...Asher Kid’shanu B’mitzvotav V’tzivanu Lateit Reishit HaGeiz LaKohein." - ...Who has commanded us to give Reishit HaGeiz to the Kohein. But the second Beracha recited does ring a bell - Shehechiyanu V’kiy’manu V’higiyanu Laz’man Hazeh. Catriel Sugarman gives
illustrated lectures on the Beit Hamikdash and related topics. He
can be reached at (02) 652-7531 or by email at acatriel@netvision.net.il.
Catriel is in the process of writing a book entitled: The Temple of
Jerusalem, A Pilgrim's Perspective: A Guided Tour through the Temple
and the Divine Service. Let’s use this week’s Parshat Sh’lach to review the third portion of the SH’MA (which will be read twice this Shabbat (in Eretz Yisrael) - at the end of SH’VI’I and for the MAFTIR. Some comments will be obvious; others, hopefully, not. va-YO-mer, the word is accented MIL’EIL, on the next to the last syllable. (Compared with its sister word va-yo-MAR, which is MILRA.) Careful not to let the end of the word fuse with the next word. It shouldn’t sound like RADONOI. Just a little bit of a pause and G-d’s name will come out the way it is supposed to. da-BEIR, pause slightly after it so that the REISH sound does not blend with the EL that follows it. This is very common in our davening (and Torah reading, but more so in davening because we are usually davening too fast). Every time we are mindful of this kind of situation and we make the effort to separate the words, the result is more careful davening. And that leads to better understanding of what we are saying, because we are already paying more attention. B’NEI and YISRAEL also should be separated slightly, so that the YUD that ends the first word and the YUD that begins the second are each sounded. There’s an old children’s... thing, don’t know what to call it, where you are asked to say TIRAS (corn) 10 or 20 times. After the first few times, the words blend to the point that you are not sure if you are hearing (or saying!) TIRAS or STIRA (slap). This illustrates the need to pause briefly between words that blend together for one of several reasons. The third pasuk of this 5-pasuk portion has several of these “situations”. UR-I-TEM OTO (not MOTO), UZ-CHAR-TEM et (not, MET), VA-A’SI- TEM OTAM (not MOTAM)... in each of these cases, the word produced has a different, and not so nice meaning. (Unlike ROTO, which doesn’t mean anything.) ASHER ATEM (not, RATEM), and ZONIM ACHAREIHEM (not MACHARERI- HEM). Don’t take this as unnecessary repetition; it’s the kind of pasuk that frustrates the person trying to eliminate bad davening habits that we’ve had for a long time. Just remember to keep saying, “I think I can, I think I can...” v’a-mar-TA - this is one of those words. a-MAR-ta, you said. Past tense. v’a-MAR-ta (not the word here), and you said. Past tense. v’a-mar-TA, accent shifted to the last syllable, and you shall say. Future or command tense/form. The VAV -and- the accent shift causes the tense to go from past to future. There are words that this doesn’t happen to. But in the case of v’a-mar-TA a-lei- HEM, misaccenting the first word DOES change its meaning. In contrast, saying a-LEI-hem is just mispronouncing the word, not changing its meaning. Of course, no words should be mispro- nounced or accented wrongly, but the error is most serious when the meaning of a word changes. Second pasuk: v’na-T’NU (of v’naw-S’NU, but not v’nas-NU). AL TZITZIT (don’t pause here, don’t kiss your tzitzit, combine the phrase) HAKANAF. Then add, P’TIL T’CHEILET. The previous time and the next time the word TZITZIT is said, they are stand-alone nouns. But this time, the word is connected to HAKANAF. It is upon the TZITZIT HAKANAF that we put (tie) the thread of T’cheilet. We’re not really finished this
review, but we are, for this issue. Let’s end with this: When one
says the last pasuk of Sh’ma, one should have KAVANA (have in mind)
to fulfill the mitzva of L’MAAN TIZKOR, in order to remember the day
you came out of the land of Egypt, all the days of your life. It’s
one of the 613 mitzvot, and this is one way we fulfill it. Have
KAVANA. <mtc> THE TIYUL HOTLINE Dial the Israel Center's number 5-66-77-87, then press 211. You'll hear "thank you, one moment please", and then the phone system's music for 15 seconds (or less). Then the Tiyul Hotline message begins. You can listen to the whole message and then press 2 to leave your message, or you can interrupt by pressing 2 right away and leaving your message sooner. What’s for lunch? When a tiyul says “bring your own lunch”, you can buy one instead from the Israel Center Cafe. Call the TRAVEL DESK or TIYUL HOTLINE up to the day before the TIYUL and request a box lunch. 18š will get you a delicious sandwich (specify your preference), a refreshing drink (specify regular or diet) and a dessert. Your box will be ready for you when you board the bus. TIYUL POLICIES Please note: We reserve the right to charge a cancellation fee in case of last-minute cancellations. (Please speak to Rochel at the Travel Desk when making reservations.) Also... Price of tiyul is based on a minimum number of participants. Students from Abroad Are your parents planning on visiting you some time this year? If so, you want to speak to us! (566-7787 ext. 211 or 249). We have many attractive deals for them... and you. Let us turn an ordinary “been there, did it” visit into an unforgettable, special one! KASHRUT POLICY Food for Israel Center In-House programs is supervised by OU-in-Israel - Mehadrin. Israel Center sponsored trips and programs are under Mehadrin Hashgacha. Hotels, restaurants, and tiyulim advertised by the Travel Desk or by outside parties are not necessarily Mehadrin and are not endorsed by the OU or the Israel Center. Tiyulim are partially subsidized
by the Jewish Agency for Israel The second event took place at the Israel Center during Shavu'ot night where, in traditional fashion, a festive milchig meal satisfied the phsyical needs of the participants who then stayed up all (or some) of the night for their spiritual “repast” - Tikun Leil Shavu’ot. Speakers included Rabbi Adam Starr, associate Rabbi of the Hebrew Institute of Riverdale, Rabbi Eddie Abramson, Israel Center Board member, Rabbi David Epstein of the Ministry of Education, Rabbi Dovid Zitter of the Israel Center’s faculty, Rabbi Binyamin Wolff, and Phil. At morning's break, most of the participants continued to the Kotel; some stayed for one more mini-shiur and then went to “Chovevei” shul for Vatikin Davening. Bar Mitzva for 90! On the Map! J.V.E.I. Makom BaLev Beit Kharkov NESTO ZULA Looking Forward… |
