ZMANIM - HALACHIC TIMES -
Correct for TT #633 All other places at some height above sea level have similar problems. Tzfat lights candles 30 minutes before sunset. Official candle lighting for Petach Tikva is 40 minutes before sunset, just like Jerusalem. Not everybody holds by that timing. Some communities calculate Shabbat out at 33 minutes after sunset. Some use the angle of the sun below the horizon to “end Shabbat” (8.5 deg). Bottom line for now: until we get the chart running smoothly, don’t rely on it exclusively. Cross-check times with calendars and charts. Please report discrepancies to us, so that we can improve our time table. Also realize that Sfardim and
Ashkenazim often has differences in minhag. 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. Last opportunity this month for Kiddush L'vana (not something you want to miss, especially in Elul) is Sunday night, Aug. 29th, the eve of 13 Elul. Seems like less than mid-month, but remember that the molad was two days before Rosh Chodesh. That's the way it happens sometimes. The 9th of Elul (Thursday) is 3570th (or so, there is a difference of opinions) yahrzeit of DAN, son of Yaakov Avinu. He was born on the same date 125 (or so) years earlier. The 9th of Elul was also the date in 5027 (1267ce) that the Ramban arrived in Yerushalayim. He was instrumental in the revival of the Jewish community in Jerusalem. Not a bad idea for each of us to
mark his/her own date of arrival in Israel, for celebration and
introspection. As the title asks: What's wrong with this picture? The answer is: No Oral Torah. That's what the parenthetical
remarks were meant to supply. Every sentence not in parentheses
could be made from reading the KJV of the Bible, or just translating
literally. Our Torah has two inseparable parts: Written and Oral. Looking at this mitzva from both ends, we first see it as a "concession to the base inclinations of a man", in the heat of battle. On the other hand, it demands more of the Jew than is common of soldiers all over the world, who are notorious for immoral and atrocious behavior of all sorts. If he decides after the one-month waiting period not to marry her, he must release her without abusing or humiliating her [533,534; L263,264 21:14]. [S>21:15 (3)] A man may not favor the son of his beloved wife over his firstborn from a "less-loved" wife. (Implication from the juxtaposition of these two topics is that marrying for the wrong motive likely leads to a "hated wife".) This passage is the source of the firstborn's inheritance. Ramban counts two mitzvot here - the positive command to give the firstborn a double portion and the prohibition of not giving it to him. Rambam and the Chinuch include the rules of the firstborn as part of the laws of inheritance from Parshat Pinchas and not separately here. This is just one of many examples of different countings among the Sages who attempted to identify the traditional 613 mitzvot. SDT The Vilna Gaon sees a hint to the double portion of the B'chor in the letters of the word B'CHOR: BET-KAF- RESH. Each letter is double the letter before it - BET is double ALEF, KAF is double YUD, REISH is double KUF. (No other letters are like that.) [S>21:18 (4)] The "rebellious
son" is warned by his parents to mend his ways. If he continues to
defy them, violates certain mitzvot, engages in a specific sequence
of actions, and if he is of a specific age and at a particular stage
of physical development, and his parents are healthy, normal, and
deemed to be on equal levels of character, then, and only then,
would it be possible to execute him as a "Ben Sorer U'moreh".
Although it is (almost) impossible to reach that ultimate point -
and sources indicate that there never actually was a case of "the
rebellious son" - this portion of the Torah serves as a stern
warning to wayward children AND their parents! Some mitzvot seem to
be intended primarily as deterrent and Mussar. The hanging of the body after execution (in some cases, not all) serves as a deterrent for others and is part of the atonement process for the soul of the guilty party. Using "Kal VaChomer", we are taught that burial, in general, and "as soon as is feasible", in particular, is the proper procedure for the dead [537,A231 21:23]. Note that although the Torah here speaks only of the executed "felon", the mitzva from the Torah includes burial of all Jewish dead. This is NOT a Rabbinic deduction, extension, or legislation - it is part of Torah Law - the Oral Law. [S>22:1 (3)] One is required to return identifiable lost objects to their rightful owners [538,A204 22:1], even if doing so is difficult. One cannot ignore this responsibility [539,L269 22:3] even if it is easier to just leave the object alone. Technically, the laws of LOST & FOUND apply to possessions of fellow Jews. However, with the potential for Kiddush HaShem and its opposite, depending upon what one does, it is important to go out of one's way to return a lost item to a non-Jew as well. This too is part of halacha, not just a nice thing to do. [S>22:4 (1)] Nor may one ignore a fellow's beast of burden that has collapsed under its load [540,L270 22:4]. One is required to help his fellow load his animals [541,A203 22:4]. Sefer HaChinuch points out that this mitzva-pair applies to other animals, not just donkey, and it applies to people as well, by reasoning a KAL VACHOMER. If you see a fellow human over-loaded with what he/she is carrying (or trying to carry), it is a mitzva to help out. [S>22:5 (5)] Men and women may not interchange apparel [542,543; L39, 40 22:5] nor do certain things that are specific to the opposite sex. Targum Yonatan on this pasuk
defines male apparel as the mitzvot of Talit and T’filin. Since
these mitzvot are WORN, and not just performed, he considers them
specific male mitzvot that women may not fulfill. Many other
authorities disagree and consider women to be exempt from these two
mitzvot, but not forbidden to them.The view of Targum Yonatan, even
if not considered the definitive p’sak on the issue, is probably
responsible for the Jewish facts of life - namely, that although
many women accept upon themselves OTHER time-related positive
mitzvot from which they are officially exempt, this is not the
common case with Talit and T’filin. Although our Sages attribute
kindness to animals as the reason (or part of the reason) for some
mitzvot - e.g. not muzzling an animal that is working with food,
helping to unload a beast of burden, not plowing with an ox and a
donkey together - they (our Sages) were more cautious with this
mitzva of SHILU’ACH HAKEN. It can be argued that it is far kinder to
leave a nest alone than to chase away the mother bird (which is
simultaneously kind and cruel - one way of looking at it). This
mitzva is more CHOK-like than other mitzvot involving animals. Oral law defines these mitzvot as more inclusive than just one's roof. Rabbinic law, "taking the Torah's lead", extends "safety & health" rules further into many areas, e.g. secondary smoking. Rambam says that a person may not tell others: "Don't tell me what to do; if I want to risk my health or life, it's my business". Saying this can make a person liable to the punishment of MAKAT MARDUT. This is something to keep in mind when you decide to "talk to" your favorite smoker. One may not plant mixed grains in a vineyard [548,L216 22:9], nor may one eat the resulting products [549,L193 22:9]. "Strangely", these two mitzvot share a parsha. [S>22:10 (2)] Plowing with ox and donkey together is forbidden, as is the tying together of any non-compatible animals (or humans) for any purpose [550,L218 22:10]. Rambam holds that the Torah prohibits any combination of a kosher and non- kosher animal, based on the fact that the Torah's example is one of each. Rambam says that combinations of two kosher or two non-kosher animals is forbidden by Rabbinic law. Many authorities challenge Rambam's distinction and say that it is all Torah law. Do not wear Shaatnez (garments of wool and linen) [551,L42 22:11] [S>22:12 (1)] ...put tzitzit on all four-cornered garments that you wear. [counted elsewhere] [S>22:13 (7)] It is a mitzva to marry according to Jewish Law and for the husband to write a K'TUBA for his wife with various promises and assurances [552,A213 22:13]. If a man had falsely accused his (betrothed) wife of infidelity, he may not divorce her (unless she so desires) [553,554; A219,L359 22:19]. Penal- ties are also paid to the girl's family for the insult. [S>22:20 (2)] If the betrothed maiden did, in fact, willfully, intentionally have relations with another man, and there are kosher witnesses and properly ad- ministered warning, and all the other rules of evidence. then she is an adulteress and is executed (stoning). [S>22:22 (1)] If a man and married woman has relations (knowing full-well the married status of the woman), and neither was forced, then they are both subject to the death penalty for adultery. [This prohibition is counted from Commandment #7] [S>22:23 (2)] The same applies if the woman is “just” betrothed (this is more than engagement in our time). The specific incident of stoning is generalized to the mitzva upon the court to carry out the punishment of "stoning" when required [555, A220 22:24]. [S>22:25 (3)] Both consenting parties to a forbidden relationship are culpable. However, if it is possible to consider the woman an unwilling partner, then she must not be punished. We must not punish anyone who might not be responsible for their action [556,L294 22:26]. This is the source of giving people the benefit of the doubt. This does not mean that the person always deserves the benefit of the doubt. Maybe they actually sinned. The answer, it will have to be left to G-d to punish them; we are obligated to explain the situation as in this example - certainly the girl screamed but there was no one to save her. [S>22:28 (2)] A man who forces himself on an unmarried maiden must pay a fine to her father. If the girl wants to be married to the man, he must marry her and never initiate divorce (she, of course, may insist that she wants nothing to do with him and then the court will force him to divorce her had they married) [557,558;A218,L358 22:29]. [S>23:1 (1)] A man may not marry his father's former wife (even after his father's death). [S>23:2 (1)] Castrated men (it depends on how their situation happened) have marriage restrictions [559,L360 23:2] [S>23:3 (1)] A "mamzer" has marriage restrictions [560,L354 23:3]. Mamzer is the offspring of a union that is prohibited by the Torah, with a death penalty. This includes incestuous and adulterous relationships. A mamzer may marry a mamzeret or a female convert to Judaism. [S>23:4 (4)] Amonite and Moabite males may not marry into the "Congregation of G-d" [561,L53 23:4], because of the cruel, inhospitable behavior of those two nations towards Israel. And also because they hired Bil’am to “bless” us. Nor may we ever offer those two nations peace as an alternative to war, as is required of other enemies [562,L56 23:7]. Note that the Torah is giving a
reason for a mitzva, something that it rarely does. However, it is
precisely the reason that allowed our Sages to declare Ruth the
Moabite able to marry into the Jewish Nation. (It was the Moavite
men who displayed that unforgivable behavior, not the women.) An offshoot of this mitzva: entry to Har HaBayit (referring to the area where the Beit HaMikdash and its courtyard DID NOT stand) by people with certain types of ritual impurity is forbidden [565,L78 23:11]. Conceptually, we must realize that G-d's presence among us is affected by our moral behavior. Thus, these mitzvot have ramifications to Jewish society as a whole, and not merely in a military setting. [S>23:16 (2)] A slave who runs from his master to us for protection, may not be returned. Nor may we abuse a slave who seeks haven in Eretz Yisrael [568,569;L254,255 23:16,17]. [S>23:18 (2)] Prostitution is forbidden [570,L355 23:18] and its revenues may not be used for sacred matters [571,L100 23:19]. (Some sources consider sex between unmarried partners part of mitzva #570.) [S>23:20 (2)] Although interest on personal loans may not be taken from a Jew, it is acceptable (and correct) to lend to non-Jews with interest [572,573;L236,A198 23:20,21]. This is so because society in general accepts the reasonableness of moderate interest on loans. Since a non-Jew can charge a Jew interest, the Torah gives us permission to take interest from them. Usury, loan sharking, would be recognized as a "universal" wrong- doing; the ban against any interest at all is a special spiritual requirement of the Jew. [S>23:22 (3)] Pledges to the Mikdash must be fulfilled within the cycle of the three festivals [574,L155 23:22]. It is advisable to refrain from
making promises, but once made, a person must keep them [575,A94
23:24]. (Hatarat N'darim provides an "out" for certain ill-advised
promises.) [S>23:26 (1)] Workers mustn't reduce their efficiency by eating on the job [578, L267 23:26]. In other words, their rights to eat [576] is restricted to their breaks. We see a beautiful balance in the area of Torah Law as it relates to boss- worker relations. On the one hand, the worker is allowed to eat from that which he picks. On the other hand, he cannot do this while he is actually working, as this would reduce his efficiency, thereby short-changing his boss. On the other hand, the boss must provide breaks during the day, when the worker is allowed to eat. On the other hand, the worker may not take any of the fruits home with him, without permission. Talmudic law adds to this list for both sides. Boss may not take advantage of worker, and worker may not take advantage of their boss. [S>24:1 (4)] If a married couple
wants to end their marriage, it must be done with a proper "get"
[579,A222 24:1]. If a divorcee has remarried, and is subsequently
widowed or divorced, she cannot remarry her first husband [580, L356
24:4]. One may not take vessels used for preparing food as a security against a loan [583,L242 24:6]. We must be sensitive to the needs of the borrower. Here's another example of two different mitzvot that share a parsha. This is noteworthy because Ki Teitzei has so many parshiyot as it is, one wonders why these were not each in their own parsha. [S>24:7 (1)] Kidnapping and selling the victim is a capital offense. Kidnapping was already prohibited by Commandment #8, LO TIGNOV (i.e. stealing a person). That was the "warning"; this is the "punishment". Both are needed. [S>24:8 (2)] We must not remove signs of "Tzora'at" [584,L308 24:8]. A blemish is TZORAAT if (if and only if) declared so by a kohen. If this happens, then using medicines or surgery to remove the affliction is forbidden and counter-productive. A person's spiritual and religious growth is triggered by the NEGA. It needs not surgery or medication, but rather introspection and repentance. Always remember what happened to Miriam. [Although Rambam and Chinuch do not count this "remember" among the 613, other mitzva-counters do.] What happened to Miriam is that she was punished for speaking ill of her brother Moshe and she was afflicted with Tzoraat; hence, the connection between these two p’sukim that share a parsha. [S>24:10 (4)] We must not be
overly forceful in the taking of a security from a poor person who
has borrowed from us [585,L239 24:10]. We must not withhold that
which has already been taken from him; if he needs it, we must
return it to him [586,587; L240, A199 24:12,13]. Notice the
positive- prohibition pair of mitzvot that we have seen quite often
in the Torah. [S>24:16 (1)] Close relatives may not testify against (or for) one another in criminal cases [589,L287 24:16]. There is also the implication here that a person will not be punished for deeds of his parents or children. This is an example (one of many) of a pasuk teaching us two or more quite different things. In this case, one's a mitzva among Taryag, the other is a teaching (for lack of a better word). [S>24:17 (2)] One must not pervert justice even on behalf of an orphan [590,L280 24:17]. Securities for a loan must not be taken from a widow [591, L241 24:17]. Our experience in Egypt is to be remembered as the motive for many of these "sensitizing" mitzvot. [S>24:19 (1)] That which is forgotten in the fields after harvesting must be left for the poor; one should not return for it himself [592,593;A122,L214 24:19]. [S>24:20 (3)] The previous parsha set down the rules of SHICH’CHA; this parsha adds rules for proper kind behavior when picking olives and grapes. Again we are reminded of our Egyptian experience. Even though Egypt was unspeakably cruel to us, our experience there is supposed to make us kinder and more sensitive. [S>25:1 (4)] The punishment of makot (whipping) is to be administered by the courts to those found guilty of sins punishable thusly, but care must be exercised not to exceed the required number of lashes [594,595; A224, L300 25:2,3]. Do not muzzle an animal when it is working with food [596,L219 25:4]. [S>25:5 (6)] The widow of a man without children is forbidden to marry anyone [597,L357 25:5] until... She either "marries" her brother-in-law (Yibum) [598,A216 25:5] or the relationship is severed by chalitza [599,A217 25:9], in which case she may marry anyone else. (Not a kohen, though, because a woman who has had CHLITZA is equivalent to a divorcee, whom a kohen may not marry.) [S>25:11 (2)] If person "A" is pursuing "B" to kill him, we must save B's life even if it means killing A [600,A247 25:12]. We cannot show mercy to the pursuer (A) [601,L293 25:12]. If it is possible to stop "A" without killing him, we must do so - to kill him in this case would be an act of murder. This is the classic RODEIF-NIRDAF situation. It forms the basis of permitting abortions when the life of the mother is threatened. Jewish law then considers the unborn fetus AS IF he is a RODEIF. This is a "stretch" since a real RODEIF has to intend to kill the one pursued; hence the term K'ILU, as if. Even though we consider a fetus to be a living being, it has a lesser status than one born, and this allows it to be deemed a RODEIF. [S>25:13 (4)] (Not only may one not use false measures, but) mere possession of false dry or liquid measures or weights is forbidden [602,L272 25:13]. Honest weights and measures is one of the pillars of society; G-d despises those who cheat in business. [P>25:17 (3)] The final portion of the sedra is "Zachor". We are commanded to remember what Amalek did to us on our way out of Egypt [603,A189 25:17]. The Jewish People as a whole are commanded to destroy the remnant of Amalek from this world [604,A188 25:18]. We must never forget what Amalek did [605,L59 25:19]. Technically, these mitzvot apply to the specific Amalek nation. The idea, however, must be extended to the Amalek-types that have plagued us throughout Jewish history. These final 3 p'sukim of the
sedra are reread for the Maftir. (See also page 16 for the special
situation of Zachor this year.) The following are the four
classes of bailees: (2) The paid bailee (Shomer Sachar). The owner, instead of asking the unpaid bailee to guard the suitcase, can check the suitcase with a clerk who is an employee of the airport and to whom the owner pays an agreed-upon fee. The owner's expectations are now higher than they were in class (1) where the bailee is unpaid. Here the bailee is getting paid and has greater responsibilities. Both the owner and the paid bailee receive benefit; the owner in that his object is being guarded, and the bailee in that he is being paid. (3) The lessee (Shocheir). A person (the lessee/bailee) wants to rent a car for a week and he goes to a car-rental agency and rents a car and pays (or will pay) the agreed-upon weekly rental. Both the owner and the lessee receive benefit; the owner/lessor by receiving a fee and the lessee the use of the car. The benefits are just the opposite in types (2) and (3). In type (2) the bailee receives a fee, and in type (3) the lessor/bailor receives the fee. In type (2) the object is held by the person receiving the fee, and in type (3) the object is held by the person paying the fee. (4) The borrower (Sho'eil). A person would like to type a letter but does not own a typewriter. He goes to a friend's house and borrows the friend's typewriter, without any fee involved. The borrower is the sole beneficiary of the transaction; the owner receives no benefit. The borrower has more responsibility than in the three prior classes. Liabilities of the bailees In general, the responsibilities and liabilities of the four classes of bailees revolve around six factors that come into play when it is not possible for the bailee to return the object to the owner; the four classes of bailees are analyzed below against these six factors. (i) The object was lost through the negligence of the bailee. (ii) The object was lost by or stolen from the bailee. (iii) The object was lost by force majeure (an event sometimes referred to as an act of God and beyond the control of the bailee to prevent). For example, a fire broke out and he cannot rescue the object; or a robber threatened to harm him if he did not surrender the object. Robbery differs from theft (the object was stolen from him). In the former the bailee is threatened and he is not in danger; in the latter the bailee is not aware that the object is being stolen and his safety is not threatened. (iv) The object "died" while being used in the natural course of events. For example, an automobile is being driven and the engine fails to work. Or a horse dies while pulling a plow, or a computer fails to function. (v) The object cannot be returned for any reason after the bailee made unauthorized use of the object. The bailee is considered to be like a robber and the object is deemed to have passed to the ownership of the bailee for purposes of liability when he made unauthorized use of the object; he is liable for its return no matter what the circumstances of its loss. (vi) The object cannot be returned for any reason but the owner was working for the bailee, even in an unrelated job, when the bailee or the borrower took possession of the object. There is an exception to this broad principle of exonerating the bailee; if the bailee intentionally damaged or destroyed the object, he will be liable even if the bailor was working for him when he took possession of the object. In all the situations the non-return of the object intact is due to the object being lost, stolen, damaged, destroyed, or to force majeure. The bailee's keeping the object for himself, or denying that the object was given to him or that he returned the object, or similar reasons are not here covered. We will now test these six factors with each type of bailee: (1) The unpaid bailee: The liabilities (the six factors) of the paid bailee, the lessee and the borrower shall be dealt with IYH in the next lesson The subject matter of this lesson
is more fully discussed in volume VIII chapters 291 of A Restatement
of Rabbinic Civil Law by E. Quint. Copies of all volumes can be
purchased via email: orders@gefenpublishing.com and via website:
www.israelbooks.com and at local Judaica bookstores. Questions to
quint@inter.net.il The Sefer HaChinukh explains that it is not enough that a person can, if he wants, borrow a Torah scroll from a neighbor, or use an old one that he inherited. While a highly motivated person will go to the trouble of studying from a borrowed book, people naturally tend to occupy themselves with the objects they find at hand, especially those that are new. Thus, the more Torah scrolls we write, the more likely a person is to interest himself in one and apply himself to Torah study. This explanation applies equally to any book of Torah learning, and this is exactly what the Chinukh explains: “Even though the primary Torah obligation is only by an actual Torah scroll, there is no doubt that each person should do according to his ability also for other books written in explanation of the Torah, and even if his ancestors left him many others.” This reasoning suggests that just as a person may be more inclined to study from a newly written Torah scroll, so are people naturally inclined to study from newly composed books which are written in the style of a particular time or community, even though the new books are not of course better than the old ones. Rav Natan of Breslav, who devoted painstaking effort to publishing the works of his Rebbe, Rav Nachman of Breslav, as well of his own works, also dilates on this topic. He first points out that originally only the written Torah (the Tanakh) could be written; the oral tradition was forbidden to write. But eventually the Sages decided that writing down the oral tradition was indispensable for its preservation. Rav Natan writes: “And this is the aspect of printing holy books on the holy Torah which has become so very widespread lately, and it is a great thing and this is the nearing of the Mashiach.” He explains in the name of Rav Nachman that “having an abundance of books is a great benefit and a great repair for Israel.” Later he adds “HaShem, may He be blessed, did a great kindness with us that the process of printing was revealed to the world, because through this holy books are multiplied in the world” (Likutei Halakhot Kiddushin 3:20-23). Please note: 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 If we look at the list of kings following Shlomo who did not worship idols, we see that the text tells us that they did right in the eyes of the Lord, still “but the BAMOT he did not remove” or “but still the people sacrificed on the BAMOT”. Even though it was forbidden to sacrifice elsewhere after the Beit HaMikdash was built, it was only after some 350 years that Hezekiah was able to stop this custom of individuals using the altars at various sites other than in Yerushalyim (Melachim Bet 18:4). It is easy to see the question of a centralized place of worship simply as power politics, a means of enforcing the authority and ensuring the political power of the Davidic kings. After all, in the Northern Kingdom, all the kings since the beginning of the separate kingdom under Yeravam ben Nevat had forbidden the aliya to Beit HaMikdash, often under the penalty of death. Pious Jews who were unable to go up to the Beit HaMikdash used local BAMOT. However, actually it really involved something deeply religious and spiritual that is intrinsic and specific to Judaism. Throughout Sefer Bereishit a MATZEIVA [single stone] was used as altars either for sacrifice or to mark something of spiritual significance. This was symbolic of a deeply human need, common to all men and women to have a connection with G-d and to express it; indeed that is the story of Sefer Bereishit. However, with the Exodus and the creation thereby of the Jewish People, a completely new dimension in religion was called into existence. Over and above the individual's relations to G-d, there was now a whole nation whose collective social, spiritual, political, economic and moral lives and experiences were subordinated to HASHEM’s will and meant to be a daily expression of that will; “Judaism is not merely a religion but a nation” (S.R.Hirsch, Exodus 6:7). So instead of the individual’s MATZEIVA so beloved of the Patriachs, there now was the MISHKAN with the MIZBEI'ACH of a number of stones, showing the unity that is a nation in worship. Once Israel entered the Promised Land, the national korbanot, daily and Shabbatot and Chagim, on which our order of prayer is based, and sin offerings that also required adherence to, Klal Yisrael were restricted to the MIZBEACH in the MISHKAN, first at Shiloh and then at Beit HaMikdash. At other periods there were the BAMOT where only freewill offerings and thanksgivings, were allowed. Sometimes the BAMOT were not intended for sacrifices at all, merely to fulfill a spiritual need. For instance, when the tribes of Reuven, Gad and half of Menashe settled in Trans-Jordan after the other tribes had possessed their inheritance across the Jordan, they felt the danger of spiritual isolation, a need to be linked to the body politic. Therefore (Joshua 22), they built an altar in their territory. Yehoshua, seeing in this a new form of rebellion against G-d, parallel to the sin of Baal Peor that was punished by plague (Bamidbar 25) and the theft by Achan of the spoils of Jericho that was punished by the national defeat at Ai (Joshua 7), threatened them with war. When the two and a half tribes made it clear that their intention was not rebellion but rather a strengthening of religious ties, Pinchas HaKohen devoted himself to making peace between the tribes of Israel He thereby finally merited the priesthood promised to him for his zealousness in killing Zimri during Israel’s sin with the daughters of Moav (Zevachim 101b). “For You have not yet come to your NACHALA and your MENUCHA” (Devarim 12:9); the NACHALA is Shilo and MENUCHA is Yerushalyim [HaMikdash] for a NACHALA flows on, but MENUCHA is final” (Zevachim 117b and Sifri). The transition from the temporary MISHKAN to the MIKDASH - MENUCHA was to be preceded by 2 of the 3 mitzvot obligatory after crossing the Jordan: anointing a king, the national heart of the Jewish spiritual-religious entity, and destroying Amalek, the symbol of divisions both between the people and between them and their G-d. The spirituality of this is shown by the materials of which the sanctuaries were built. The MISHKAN was only of the vegetable and the animal world; that was the limited spirituality of Israel in the desert. Once Israel is settled in its land but before these 2 mitzvot were carried out, the time is ripe for the NACHALA, so Shilo had walls of stone and the covering of the MISHKAN; Israel in its preordained Land had the additional spirituality and could partially sanctify the inanimate world. MENUCHA, that is, the centralized worship of the MIKDASH, after kingship and Amalek, gave Israel an additional spiritual power to sanctify even the stone; it was built completely of the inanimate (Shem Mi Shmuel). It is easy to understand the
natural inclination of our fathers that continues even to this day,
to constantly revert to the individualized worship of Hashem that is
common to all Mankind. However, in Judaism the truth of a nation
whose whole social-political-moral- economic being is devoted to G-d
is so vital, that even kings who otherwise followed HASHEM were
criticized for not enforcing this centrality of worship by
destroying the BAMOT. “And Amatzyahu did that which was right in the
eyes of the Lord… but he did not remove the BAMOT... And still the
people sacrificed on them” (14:3-4)’. This sin, unlike the Jewish
tradition that spiritual troubles are rooted in the leadership, is
ascribed always to the people, as in verse above. Furthermore, so
important is this national centralized worship that the Northern
Kingdom was destroyed for not observing it and continuing to worship
outside of the MIKDASH. “There were no CHAGIM in Israel like Tu B’av
when King Hoshea ben Eilah removed the golden calves in Dan and
Bethel. Even when he did so the people still did not go up to the
MIKDASH in Yerushalyim. Said HASHEM, ‘Because of all the years that
Israel did not go up, they will go into exile’” (Ta’anit 30b; Gittin
88a). We publicized this question two
years ago. However, the problem is recurring or long lasting enough
to merit periodic repetition. The answer has been re-edited. A There is nothing new under the sun. Rav Kook wrote a pamphlet called “Chevesh P’er” to strengthen the fulfillment of the mitzva of tefillin. His main complaint was that men wear the tefillin shel rosh too low (forward) on their heads and urged leaders to rectify the matter. The gemara (Menachot 37a) learns (as opposed to the Tzedukim) that the Torah, although instructing to place the tefillin "bein einecha" (between your eyes), refers to the part of the head that can be shaved, not the forehead. Thus, the forward-most part of the tefillin may go no lower than where the roots of the hairline exit the scalp (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 27:9). If that front part does not sit directly on the head but is suspended (which is sometimes a sign that they are too low), one draws an imaginary, perpendicular line to where it would touch. There is a machloket (dispute) among Rishonim whether the upper part of the tefillin (where they are fastened) can be placed anywhere on the top of the head or only on the front half. The gemara (ibid.) talks about putting tefillin on, or up to and including, the place of a baby’s soft spot (see Beit Yosef, OC 27 and Biur Halacha on 27:9). The most stringent opinion is that the tefillin must fit in the first 4 finger-widths (or slightly more) of the head, starting from the hairline (see Kaf Hachayim 27:41). This is based on the gemara that there is room on the head to place two pairs of tefillin (Eruvin 95b), assuming a minimum of two finger-widths for tefillin (see Mishna Berura 32:189). Poskim agree that it is more crucial that the tefillin not be even slightly too low than that they not extend too far back (Chavosh P’er, 2; Biur Halacha, ibid.). Why do so many men put their tefillin too low or too close for comfort? When large tefillin are fastened (by the part which is furthest back) so that they feel secure on the head (which is usually when they are relatively forward), they are likely to extend beyond the end of the hairline. (While it is easier to make mehudar tefillin that are big, when they are too big, it increases the problems of improper placement.) What usually happens is that people are fitted when they get new tefillin or retzuot, expecting that they are set for life. But the retzuot stretch as they are used, and the tefillin extend further forward. Few people know how to adjust the knot to compensate and many don’t know that this is periodically necessary. Even someone who knows the halachic element, but is bald or has a receding hairline, is likely to assume that all is well and that the tefillin look low because of a receding hairline. Although we do follow the original hairline, many exaggerate how low it was and have no way of checking other than memory or comparing themselves to the younger generation. (Old pictures don’t always show the roots.) It is important to correct people whose tefillin slip down and certainly those whose retzuot are so loose that they may not have fulfilled the mitzva in years and make a beracha l’vatala daily (see Rav Kook’s appeal). However, one must be very careful how he corrects others (see Rashi, Vayikra 19:17). It’s best if the rabbi periodically urges men to ask him to check and/or adjust. If this isn’t done, an individual may have little choice but to gently approach those who need help. For some, it pays to leave an anonymous note. (The sensitivity issue is usually more acute for older people, who are more likely to resent being approached by someone much younger.) Asking, “Do you want your kesher adjusted?” is preferable to, “Your tefillin are on wrong”. It takes little dexterity and training to do the trick, and it does not require undoing the knot. 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 info@eretzhemdah.org with the
message: Subscribe/English (for the English version) or
Subscribe/Hebrew (for the hebrew version). Please leave the subject
blank. Ask the Vebbe Rebbe is partially funded by the Jewish Agency
for Israel "Thank you!", said R' Yisrael. "I
was afraid that what I said didn't even go in one ear. Now that I
hear that it goes in one ear and out the other, I am sure that at
least something will remain." The message of this week’s Torah portion is different. The opening verse, “When you go forth to war against your enemies,” teaches that war is an integral part of our Divine national mission. Seven out of the 613 mitzvot of the Torah deal with war. God Himself is called “The Master of War.” Ramban explains that the commandment to wage war, milchemet mitzva, is part of the mitzva of dwelling in the Land of Israel and keeping it under Jewish sovereignty. Establishing nation- al Jewish life in Eretz Yisrael is the way that we perform this mitzva, to be actively pursued by the Jewish People at all times. We do this with the IDF and with the Aliya of every Jew to the Land of Israel. Not only with tanks and airplanes, but with every new Jewish house, stroller, and washing machine. The Torah’s commandments dealing
with war teach us that even when enemy nations dispute our right to
the Land, we must call up our inner fortitude and courage, and
summon our readiness to sacrifice for the sake of our Land, our
nation, and our God. We must take active steps to enter the Land of
Israel, dwell in it, and establish God’s Kingdom on earth, even at
the price of personal hardship and war. The precept of defending the
Jewish nation in the Land of Israel and developing Jewish settlement
in all of its borders is the Divine command which beckons to all of
world Jewry today, just as it did in the time of Joshua. As the
Haftara says, “And your seed shall possess nations, and make
desolate cities to be inhabited. Don’t be afraid.” Now, the time of "forgetting", as mentioned above, is not referred to in the Gemara as a year, but rather as 12 months. If one considers this to be synonymous with a year, then there is no problem with the yearly observance of Shabbat Parshat Zachor. But if 12 months is to be taken literally - as some halachic authorities of the past did - then we have an interesting situation coming up. 5765 is a 13-month year, with two Adars. Zachor will be read in the second Adar, which will be more than 12 months since the last time it was read. According to some opinions, that constitutes an improper non-fulfillment of the mitzva of Zachor. The solution is to request of the
Torah reader this Shabbat, that when he reads the final three
p'sukim of Ki Teitzei (which is actually done twice), he should have
in mind the mitzva of Zachor (IF it needs to be fulfilled now). And
we listening, should also have in mind to fulfill this mitzva. The moonrat (not a rat or even a rodent) is the largest living insectivore (one of 20 or more orders of mammals - order being a major subdivision of class and a major grouping of families and species). There are approx. 420 species of insectivores (among over 4000 species of mammals). Order Insectivora is comprised of a wide variety of mammals... including shrews, moles, hedgehogs... tendency to eat insects, but they will also eat other invertebrates such as worms and even some vertebrates (fish, lizards, etc). Insectivores are small and rodent-like in appearance. (The pygmy white-toothed shrew is the world's smallest mammal.) Insectivores have an excellent sense of smell and touch, but have poor senses of sight and hearing... they are absent from Australia and most of South America... The moonrat is a narrow animal
the size of a house cat, with a long pointed muzzle... long,
tapering, sparsely-haired, scaly tail and short limbs. It fur is
short and soft with long coarse guard hairs throughout. It is
usually black with a white head and neck, although occasionally it
is almost entirely white. Head and body length is 25-45cm and it
weighs about .5-1.5 kilo... it is found in Southeast Asia...
Terrestrial. Tropical lowland and foothill forests... shelters among
tree roots, in hollow logs, or under rocks, and frequents moist
areas such as stream edges. It is solitary and active both day and
night, foraging for earthworms, beetles, roaches, termites, insect
larvae, millipedes and centipedes, spiders, scorpions, and various
aquatic invertebrates and larval amphibians. The moonrat is
notorious for its characteristic onion or rotten-garlic odor,
produced by an anal glandular secretion...there are usually two
young per litter. The Midrash cites Rabbi Pinchas Bar Chama who said of the mitzvot, “Wherever you go pious deeds accompany you”. The Midrash then lists a number of illustrative examples – from putting a parapet on the roof of a new house to affixing mezuzot on your doorposts, from not ploughing with an ox and an ass together to leaving forgotten sheaves in the field. So whenever and wherever one is engaged in something, the mitzvot materialize. In the words of Nechama Leibowitz, mitzvot are like good angels accompanying us, gracing our daily acts, consecrating our most mundane and earthly duties, and elevating our daily, egoistic activities to the level of a Divine service. The profundity of the Midrash is
most drawn out as we reach its climactic end. For then Rabbi Pinchas
alludes to the well-known instruction of releasing the mother bird
if you perchance upon her sitting on her eggs and you take away her
offspring (Devarim 22:6-7). In other words: even if you are not
engaged in any particular work but are merely journeying on your
way, the mitzvot accompany you. Ma'ayan Shilo'ach - The Siloam
Spring Located within walking distance to the southeast of Har HaBayit, the Shilo'ach, i.e. Ma'ayan Gichon, is the most copious of the three natural sources of water in the Jerusalem area, the others are Ein Rogel, a well further to the southeast (Bir Ayoub), and Mei Nafto'ach to the west. Its waters were once famed for their sweetness and purity. "Had you been worthy, you would be dwelling in Jerusalem and drinking the waters of the Shilo'ach, whose waters are pure and sweet… (Eicha Rabba 19). Filthy, the spring water is no longer potable because it has long been polluted by the sewage of the adjacent Arab village, Silwan. Flowing forth from the rocks (the Hebrew root, GIMEL-YUD-CHET means "breaking forth"), the Gichon water is channeled into a pool which is called the Shilo'ach because the excess water was used for irrigation. The name Shilo'ach is derived from SHELACH, "irrigation canal". The first time the Gichon is mentioned in Tanach is in Melachim Alef which describes the anointing of Shlomo HaMelech in vivid detail. "And the king (David) said unto them (Bathsheva, Tzadok HaKohein, Natan HaNavi and Benayahu): 'Take with you the servants of your lord (i.e. the Chereiti & Peleiti v. 38), and cause Solomon my son to ride upon my own mule (horses did not come into common use in Eretz Yisrael until Solomon's reign), and bring him down to the Gichon. And let Tzadok the Kohen and Natan the Prophet anoint him there king over Israel; and blow the Shofar, and say: Long live King Solomon. Then you shall come up after him and he shall come and sit on my throne; for he shall be king in my stead…" (ibid. 1:33-35). Some 150 years later, his descendent Chezkiyahu HaMelech, foreseeing an imminent Assyrian invasion, took active steps to ensure Jerusalem's water supply and at the same time to deny the much needed water to the enemy. "And when Hezekiah saw that Sennacherib (King of Assyria) was come and proposed to fight against Jerusalem, he took council with his princes and his mighty men to stop the waters of the fountains which were outside the city and they helped him. So there were gathered much people together, and they stopped all the fountains, and the brook that flowed through the midst of the land, saying; 'Why should the kings of Assyria come and find much water'?" (Devrei Hayamim Bet 32:2-4) "This same Hezekiah stopped the upper watercourse of the Gichon and brought it straight down to the west side of the city of David…" (ibid. v. 30). An incredible feat, Chezkiyahu's engineers had succeeded in closing the outlet of the Gichon at the foot of the City of David and diverting the spring water through a conduit cut through solid rock 533m long, with a height of 1.1-3.4m, a width of 0.58-0.65m and a gradient of about 4%. They succeeded in causing the spring water to flow into a pool within the city walls and thereby denying it to the invader. In 1880, an extraordinary inscription carved in beautiful paleo-Hebrew was discovered on the tunnel wall 6m from the pool. This inscription (now in an Istanbul museum) dramatically describes the final moments of the completion of the excavation when the two teams of tunnelers working from opposite ends met. "And this was the manner of the boring through: when yet the hewers were lifting the pickaxes, each towards his fellow, and when there were 3 Amot yet to be bored (through the rock), the voice of each calling to his fellow was heard ….And at the end of the boring, the hewers struck,each to meet his fellow, pickaxe against pickaxe. Then the waters went from the source to the pool (in the city) for 200 and 1000 Amot. 100 Amot was the height of the rock above the heads of the hewers…". Melachim Bet 20:20 summarizes the achievements of Hezekiah's reign, "And the rest of the acts of Hezekiah… how he made the pool, and the conduit, and brought water into the city, are they not written in the books of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?" Various Midrashim relate that, with the destruction of Jerusalem, Malchut Beit David, the honor of the Kohein Gadol, Ru'ach Hakodesh, the Sanhedrin, the Beit HaMikdash and the abundance of the waters of the Gichon passed away. The Midrash relates how after the Destruction, G-d reduced the Gichon, which had previously fructified all of Eretz Yisrael, to a comparatively insignificant fountain. We are also told that the Gichon played a vital role in the dawn of human history. Pirkei Rabbi Eliezer teaches us that "…after his expulsion from Gan Eden, Adam HaRishon betook himself to the waters of the upper Gichon where, without food, he stood up to his neck in the water for seven weeks continually until his body became perforated like a sponge. He then prayed to G-d saying: 'Forgive my sins and accept my repentance, so that all future generations may know that repentance is efficacious and that You will forgive those who return to you.' Whereupon G-d stretched forth His right hand, accepted Adam's repentance and forgave his sins." (The Midrash notes the similarity of Gichon to Gachan - he bent down, i.e. he repented.) Is the theme of repentance the true link between the waters of the Gichon, its adjoining pool the Shilo'ach, and the Nisuch Hamayim? Would this not be a connection of far greater import than mere geographical proximity? Can we picture the Kohanim as they performed Nisuch HaMayim whispering in prayer, "As Adam HaRishon's sin was forgiven as a result of his penitence when he stood in the Gichon, so may the transgressions of Am Yisrael his descendent be forgiven as we pour water from that very same spring on the Mizbei'ach"? Did not Rabbi Akiva visualize G-d saying, "Pour out water before Me on Sukkot, so your rains this year will be blessed"? (Rosh HaShana 16a) "My transgressions do I recall this day..." I have been living in Jerusalem for almost 35 years and I never "did" Hezekiah's Tunnel, something almost every tourist does. I finally did it only a couple of weeks ago. Armed with flashlights and expendable sneakers, together with a small group I visited the growing Jewish community of Ir David and then entered Hezekiah's conduit, water up to my knees. I found it very meaningful to see the very place where MY king, King Solomon, was anointed and to have the privilege of climbing through the engineering marvel dug by his resourceful descendent, Hezekiah King of Judah. Gazing upon the Shilo'ach, it was not hard for me to "see" thousands of white-clad Kohanim joined by an immense jubilant crowd congregating near the water. To the sound of trumpets, a Kohein approached the Shilo'ach pool, the waters of Gichon where Adam HaRishon obtained forgiveness for his transgression. The Kohein held a golden flagon in his hand... Catriel is in the process of
writing a book: The Temple of Jerusalem, A Pilgrims Prospective; A
Guided Tour through the Temple and the Divine Service Buy Tefila L'Chayalei Tzahal
cards (for yourself, family, and friends) for 5NIS each Proceeds
benefit injured and needy soldiers. Cards available at the Israel
Center - front desk LUNCH? When a tiyul says “bring your own lunch”, you can order one instead from the Israel Center Cafe. When you make your reservation for the tiyul, request a box lunch, or call the CAFE (ext. 257) up to the day before the TIYUL. 18NIS will get you a sandwich (your choice), a refreshing drink (regular or diet) and a dessert. Your lunch will be ready for you when you board the bus. CANCELLATION POLICIES We reserve the right to charge a cancellation fee in case of last-minute cancellations. Also... Price of tiyul is based on a minimum number of participants. Students from Abroad Parents visiting you some time this year? If so, you want to speak to us! (566-7787 ext. 244). 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 Mehadrin. 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. Calls from abroad: People from
abroad should fax 972-2-5660156 for the Attention of Ahuva or email
to tiyul@israelcenter.co.il The Physician, Genetic & Social
Responsibility, Prof. Alan Rubinow, M.D.Chief, Dept. Rheumatology,
Hadassah Ein Karem Current Management of Stroke, Dr.
Auri Spigelman, M.D., M.P.H. FACS, Associate Vascular Surgeon,
Shaare Zedek |
