MISC section - contents:
1. Vebbe Rebbe
2. Rite & Reason
3. Hasidic Wisdom
4. Words of Wisdom; Words of Wit
5. Candle by Day
6. G'Matriya Match
7. Hebrew Words
8. Torah from Nature
9 Chizuk V'Idud
10. From the desk of the director

From the virtual desk of the OU VEBBE REBBE
The Orthodox Union – via its website – fields questions of all types in areas of kashrut, Jewish law and values. Some of them are answered by Eretz Hemdah, the Institute for Advanced Jewish Studies, Jerusalem, founded by HaRav Shaul Yisraeli, zt"l to prepare rabbanim and dayanim to serve the National Religious community in Israel and abroad. Ask the Rabbi is a joint venture of the OU, Yerushalayim Network, Eretz Hemdah... and the Israel Center. The following is a Q&A from Eretz Hemdah...

[This is an abridged version of last week's question, including responses to our inquiries. See last week’s TT if you haven’t done so already.]
Q I, as an architect, was authorized by a client to hire for them a structural engineer to supplement my work. As lead contractor, I am supposed to arrange all payments. I was mildly negligent in not sufficiently warning the client that the engineer would have to do a lot of work. The client now refuses to pay for the engineering work. Should I pay the engineer from the money I was paid for my plans? The engineer and I have no written or even specific, oral agreement, but we both assume to be working within accepted practice. The American Institute of Architects (AIA) told me that in their standard contract, it says that the architect should pay the consultants according to the percentage of money received from the client and diligently pursue the remainder of the payment. They provided no information to fit this exact case.

A Your responsibility to subcontractors is as an agent and, thus, you aren't required to pay them out of your pocket when the client refuses to pay. This is confirmed by professional practice and by the AIA standard contract.
The client was required to pay you, part on your own behalf and part on the engineer's behalf. When one receives partial payment from a joint debtor, who gets the money? The Shulchan Aruch (CM 58:4) and Rama (ibid. 83:2) rule that he who receives the payment has the power to determine what debt the payment refers to, even against the intention of the one who pays. Thus, you should have been able to keep all the payment for your architectural services. However, this isn't always the right thing to do, and your case is also different.

An agent who arranges that A will work for B can obligate himself to pay personally for the work done (Bava Metzia 76a). While this is not the case in your situation, fully, it is partially. The AIA contract obligates the architect not to take all of his money before his consultants get a proportional share. As you accept this contract as the fair, industry standard, it is as if you agreed explicitly to forgo your right to keep all payment.

However, the plot thickens. Although we learned that the creditor can overpower the desire of the debtor in determining the payment's nature, the debtor can still state his preference. Although convention does not allow you to demand payment for yourself first, if it is the client who refuses to give money to the consultant, it does not seem logical that you must refuse payment for yourself in the meantime. (A clear, public ruling of the AIA to the contrary would overrule our logic by convention).

At first glance, this is your situation, as your client feels that he has gained from your work but not significantly from the engineer's work. However, upon further consideration [ed. note- realize that the description of the case is abridged], this seems to be an oversimplified evaluation. The client does not seem to question primarily the quality of the engineer's work or his basic diligence, but the broad mandate he was given to investigate engineering issues beyond the client's interest, and he blames you at least partially for this. For our purposes, it is less important whether the client is right, but how he would answer the following questions. "Did you intend that the whole payment go to the architect, and that the engineer doesn't deserve a cent? Or do you feel that the total amount paid represents the value of services received, that neither the archi- tect nor engineer acted properly, and so let them figure out themselves how to split up the money?" If the latter is true, as it sounds, then we go back to the AIA standard that the architect should not decide to take a propor- tionally higher percentage of the payment than the engineer. If the refusal to pay in full is a disingenuous excuse, then it is more clear that the AIA standard applies, as the supposed non-payment for one service is actually a general partial payment.

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

Rite and Reason by Shmuel Pinchas Gelbard
According to Nusach Ashkenaz, the final bracha of the Amida at Shacharit and Musaf is SIM SHALOM and at Mincha and Maariv it is SHALOM RAV. SIM SHALOM replaces SHALOM RAV at Mincha of a Fast Day. Additionally, in Eretz Yisrael, SIM SHALOM is also said for Mincha on Shabbat.
Reason: During Shacharit and Musaf, there is Birkat Kohanim. SIM SHALOM recapitulates the blessing of the kohanim, as if it were a continuation of Birkat Kohanim. This would explain the switch to SIM SHALOM on a Fast Day, when there is Birkat Kohanim at Mincha.
The minhag of Eretz Yisrael for Shabbat Mincha can be explained by a sentence in SIM SHALOM: “For by the light of Your countenance You have given us a Torah of life”. The reference to Torah fits with our having read Torah on Shabbat Mincha. (And this reason would cover Shacharit- Musaf as well as Mincha on Fast Days.)
Thus, the link to Birkat Kohanim can explain the Ashkenaz minhag in Chutz La- Aretz and the Torah reading can explain the practice in Israel.

Hasidic Wisdom from the book by Simcha Raz (Elkins/Elkins)
When you go through the furrows of a field, you must go up and down from one flower bed to the next.
This is true as well when you worship G-d.
At times you ascend and at times you descend. At times you overcome your base impulses, and at times they strike back at you.
Just make sure that you strike the final blow. — Rabbi Moshe of Kobrin
Everything in this world can be imitated except for the truth.
Because an artificial, counterfeit truth is not the truth at all. — Rabbi Menachem Mendel of Kotzk

ArtScroll Series • Mesorah Publications Ltd.
WORDS OF WISDOM WORDS OF WIT by Shmuel Himelstein

A man on his deathbed was afraid that his slave would not hand over the estate to his son, but would steal it for himself. He then wrote a will which stated that his entire estate would belong to the slave — with the son permitted to take only one item of the estate for himself.
After the father’s death, when the son found out about the provisions of the will, he became very upset and ran to the RAV for advice. “Rabbi”, he said, “my father left his entire fortune to his slave. All I am allowed to have is one item. What should I do?”
“My son”, said the RAV, “your father was a very wise man. By writing his will the way he did, he made sure that the slave would not squander all your money in your absence. As to which item to select as your own, I suggest you select the slave, for the law is that whatever is owned by a slave belongs to his master.”

We sometimes cause ourselves unnecessary suffering by erroneously assuming that if we had not made the choice we did, we would have made a wiser one. - From A Candle by Day by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein

G'matriya Match
V'ATA T'TZAVEH ET B'NEI YISRAEL V'YIKCHU EILEICHA SHEMEN ZAYIT ZACH KATIT L'MAOR L'H'ALOT NER TAMID
This mitzva in the Mikdash is fulfilled by the kohen in charge of tending the Menora.
But the spirit of this mitzva, the Jewish way of life that it symbolizes — G-d com- manded Moshe to tell all of Israel to light and carry the torch of Torah and to use only the purest means to do it.
In the merit of this mitzva, may we be privileged to the fulfillment of G-d’s promise:
V'ZACHARTI ET BRITI YAAKOV V'AF ET BRITI YITZCHAK V'AF ET BRITI AVRAHAM EZKOR V'H'AARETZ EZKOR
These two p’sukim are G’matriya Twins.

In most TTs of late, there has been a Hebrew word from the Academiya L’Lashon HaIvrit, often words they don’t teach you in Ulpan, or in school.
There’s a new commercial on radio or TV for some product; it has a catchy tune for its slogans. What’s that called in English? Jingle.Right. And in Hebrew? JINGLE? Nice try. Most people will use that word in Hebrew. But the “real” word for jingle is ZAMRIR.

MA RABU MA'ASECHA HASHEM KULAM B'CHOCHMA ASITA MAL'A HA'ARETZ KINYANECHA • MUREX TRUNCULUS
We’ve had similar material in the past, specifically for Parshat Shlach and/or Korach, where the topic of Tzitzit (and T’cheilet) is an issue. But this week’s sedra (and last week’s, and two and three weeks from now) calls our attention to T’cheilet in a big way (as well as Argaman), and another look at Murex Trunculus (MT) is called for.
Note too, that not everyone agrees that MT is the source of T’cheilet, and some author- ities are of the opinion that it is irrelevant whether MT is or isn’t, claiming that once the MASORET (tradition) of T’cheilet was lost, we cannot rediscover it on our own. It will be one of the item’s on Eliyahu HaNavi’s agenda. There is, however, a growing number Rabbis, scholars, and scientists who are certain (or almost so) that MUREX TRUNCULUS is indeed the source of T’cheilet, and that this long-forgotten mitzva can and should be revived.
The following information comes mostly from the website of the P’til Tekhelet association, www.tekhelet.com
Tekhelet is one of the colors mentioned in the Torah, traditionally considered a shade of blue... There is a Biblical commandment to tie a thread of Tekhelet around the tzitzit... In addition, Tekhelet is required in the garments of the Kohein Gadol (Eifod, Choshen, Me’il, Avneit, Tzitz), possibly regular kohanim (Avneit, maybe), as well as for the inner covering of the Mishkan, the Parochet, and Masach (twice), and the coverings of the holy vessels for traveling. (That’s a lot of T’cheilet!)
The Talmud describes Tekhelet as coming from a sea-creature called a CHILAZON. In a homiletic passage, the chilazon is characterized as "similar to the sea, being similar to [but not] a fish, and coming up from the sea once in seventy years [rarely]." Chilazon in modern Hebrew means "snail". Rabbinic, historical, archaeological and chemical evidence point to Murex trunculus snails as the source of Tekhelet.
Murex snails possess a gland which contains the source of Tekhelet. Dibromoindigo, which originates from glandular secretions of a fresh snail, bonds chemically to wool when put into solution in a reduced state (vat dyeing). In the presence of sunlight, the dibromoindigo debrominates to indigo, leaving color-fast blue wool.
Murex trunculus snails live along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea. In ancient Israel, the tribe of Zebulun, located on the North-East coast, was attributed with having the chilazon. Archaeological digs have since uncovered mounds of broken Murex shells and remains of the dyeing industry on the North-Eastern coast of Israel. Today, since Murex trunculus snails are a protected species in Israel, snails for Tekhelet are obtained and processed outside of Israel (Greece, Spain)...
Chemical analysis of stains on a vat revealed that an advanced dye industry using Murex trunculus snails was well established on the Canaanite coast almost 500 years ago, and mounds of crushed Murex shells from the same period have been found at Sarepta, Dor, and various other locations along the shores of Northern Israel and Lebanon.
During the latter 150 years or so of Bayit Sheni, the Roman emperors banned the use of purple and ble dye except for royalty.
Tekhelet was brought from Israel to the Babylon in the days of R. Achai (506CE), the last positive indication of the use of tekhelet...Until recently!

CHIZUK and IDUD (for the Oleh & not-yet-Oleh respectively)
The casual reader of this week's Torah portion might not notice that a signif- icant name is absent. The opening phrase, "And you, command the Children of Israel” is obviously addressed to Moses, but his name is not mentioned; not at the opening nor anywhere else in the portion. Through Sh’mot, Vayikra, and Bamidbar, there is no other portion where he is "missing". This is especially ironic, since the yahrzeit of our great teacher Moses, the 7th of Adar, always occurs in the calendar of this week. This coincidence serves to under- score a historical tragedy in the life of Moses.
By all standards of drama, Moses was a tragic figure. He was raised among strangers. He had to flee his birthplace as a fugitive though he had stood up for justice. His marriage was a troubled one, and his children are barely mentioned in the Torah. What are the accomplishments that a man of Moses' stature might have wanted in life? After all, he didn't seek greatness or leadership, all of that having been thrust upon him by G-d. He might have wanted at the very least, to see the fulfillment of his life's work, to bring Israel safely to the Promised Land and enter it with them. Perhaps he might have wanted to see his children follow in his path and succeed him, to have the pleasure in them that is characteristic of Jewish parents. Tragically, he was denied both in his life- time. His posterity is missing from Jewish history. His brother Aaron's descendants are widely known in Jewish history and the community, the kohanim. Who can claim to be a descendant of Moses?
Equally tragic, he was denied the joy of entering the Promised Land, though he pleaded and beseeched G-d for that favor. It was just not to be. To spend a whole life aiming for Israel and to die before accomplishing it. That is a tragedy born of irony. Moses who transmitted the mitzvot, all Jewish values, to a people for all generations, was denied the opportunity to actually fulfill any of the many mitzvot which apply only in the Land of Israel, foremost among which is that of actually taking possession of the Land of Israel, living there, and settling the Land.

And how shall we look at a generation in history that has the ability to succeed where Moses failed? That has the opportunity of entering and building the Holy Land if it would only be willing to do so? Moses so desired to enter Israel, longed for it, and shared that love and longing with all future generations of the Children of Israel. Can we prove ourselves worthy of his yearnings? - Rabbi Macy A. Gordon, Jerusalem

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

From the Desk of the Director
Parshat Tezave opens with a command to Moshe to instruct the Jewish people to bring him, "pure pressed oil for illumination to kindle the lamp continually" (Vayikra 27:20). The continuous nature of the burning lamp partic- ularly relates to the "Western" lamp of the Menorah that, although filled with enough oil to last twelve hours, actually remained alight all the time (cf. Bab. Talmud, Menachot 98b).

This phenomenon, the Avnei Ezel points out, was of great delight to Moshe for, "It was a testimony to mankind that the Divine Presence rests in Israel" (cf. Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 22b).

This universal revelation was for Moshe a supreme goal in life. He could thus rejoice in the fact that Bnei Yisrael had to bring the oil directly to him for inspection of its purity. This procedure also ensured his personal role in preparing the Mishkan, a task in which he generally had no direct share. It also undoubtedly bonded him closely to the people.

For Moshe was no longer the 'detached' leader who gave the orders; he was now at one with Bnei Yisrael in building the Sanctuary, in bringing the mundane to the level of pure holiness. The absolute purity of the oil, of course, mirrored the impeccability with which the Kohanim had to conduct themselves. In essence, this insistence on the burning of the finest oil also indicated to generations of Jewish people that their paramount mission was (and remains) to be a pure light unto the nations.