Q: My family wants to take a cab to the kotel and walk back. We have a stroller for our baby, and we need a car seat for our son. Is the car seat muktzeh (it has no other use)? If so, can I fold it up and put it on the stroller before Shabbat and thereby bring it home?

A: We must deal with three questions. To what category of utensil does the car seat belong? If it is muktzeh, can you find a use for it that allows you to carry it? If it is forbidden to carry, can you push it along with permitted things (i.e. the baby) in the stroller?

Category: A car seat is a kli shemelachto l’isur (=KSHMLI - a utensil whose main use is for forbidden activity). It is true that the seat is not directly doing the driving, unlike most cases of KSHMLI, which are directly involved in a violation (e.g. pen, car, etc.). However, other utensils which serve an otherwise permitted function within the framework of a violation are KSHMLI. This includes phone books and car doors (regardless of activating lights) (see Shemirat Shabbat K’hilchata (=SSK) 20:17 and more).

Possibility to move such an object: One may move a KSHMLI only for a permissible function or if it is in the way, but not to protect it (Shulchan Aruch, OC 308:3). You want to protect the car seat from getting lost. But the Magen Avraham (308:8) allows thinking up a use for the KSHMLI and moving it with that excuse even if one’s main intention is protecting it. The Mishna Berura (=MB - 308:17) accepts the premise, but perhaps only for a “real need,” but Machatzit HaShekel, Yalkut Yosef (ad loc.) and Rav Sh. Z. Orbach allow contriving a need. However, you have to have a real plan to use the car seat after coming home, and some require that for the use you design, you cannot easily use a non-muktzeh utensil (MB 308:12; SSK 20:8). If you can be creative, great.

Carrying with other things: Pushing a stroller with muktzeh in it is indirect moving, which is forbidden if done for the muktzeh’s “welfare” (Shul. Ar. 311:8). In our case, the stroller’s other contents, especially the baby, are more significant than the car seat, and you can push the stroller for their sake (ibid. 309:3).However, the gemara (Shabbat 142a) says that if fruit and a stone are in a basket, one must shake out the stone if he can do so without doing damage. So must you remove the car seat or not put it in to start with? Most poskim rule that even if the only thing to be damaged (or, in this case, lost) is the muktzeh, one need not shake it out (Sha’ar Hatziyun 309:17). So you should be able to leave the car seat in the stroller.

Yet there is still a problem. What is the nature of the permission to keep the muktzeh in a case of damage? Is it because when one pushes muktzeh and non-muktzeh together, it is a permissible act unless one refuses the opportunity to remove the muktzeh? Or is it considered moving muktzeh, but it is permitted because of the need? If the latter is true, then the need may be suspect here. After all, you want to create a situation where the car seat, which you may not move to protect, is on the stroller so that you have an excuse not to shake it off. Indeed, Tosafot and the Ritva (on Shabbat 142a) say that carrying the basket with the fruit and stone is carrying muktzeh and is permitted only because of need. (Rambam, Shabbat 25:16 can be explained either way- Chazon Ish, OC 47:22). We have not found a source discussing purposely creating a “joint basket” of muktzeh and non-muktzeh before Shabbat, and our inclination is that it is not proper.

There are those who permit moving a KSHMLI if one puts a non-muktzeh object on it (Shul. Ar. 308:5; see MB, ad. loc.). Another possible but not unanimous idea for a fold-up car seat is to carry it in a backpack from before Shabbat. This is because one may continue carrying a KSHMLI when he started doing so permissibly (see MB 308:13, SSK 20:26 and sources cited there). Thus, we cannot rule out the grounds and means for leniency, especially in a case of need.

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

[2] Candle by Day
Half-baked truths should not be discarded but returned to the oven.
From A Candle by Day by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein

[3] CHIZUK and IDUD (for Olim & not-yet-Olim respectively)
The "blessing" of Bil'am, "ma tovu ohalekha ya'akov…." is the subject of one of Rashi's better known commentaries. Rashi remarks that Bil'am, inspired by the sight of the Jewish encampment in the desert, praised the camp for its planning, which took into consideration human needs and respect for privacy. In our daily lives, we interpret this verse differently, for we recite this verse when we enter a shul. This practice is based on a midrash which under- stands the tents and the "mishkanot" mentioned by Bil'am as a reference to the shuls and study halls of Israel. This midrash is, in turn, a reworking of another midrash which identifies the "tent" with the "ohel mo'ed" and the "mishkan" with the mishkan of Shilo.

Transforming the tent and the mishkan into shul and study hall is a common theme in midrashic literature. It is meant to help us think that the devastation of the destruction of the Temple was not total and that we survive in our shuls and study halls. The daily use of this interpretation of the verse shows us how much Judaism outside of Israel is focused on shul and yeshiva life. Outside of Israel, we are not able to build a Jewish society that reflects the human values which inspired Bil'am.

The focusing of Jewish life in the shul is, how- ever, only temporary, as all of Jewish existence in exile is temporary. It is well known that many shuls outside Israel have been converted to churches. I tell people who build magnificent edifices for shuls that they should take into consideration that their shul may one day turn into a church. Only in the land of Israel do we find permanent Jewish existence, as reflected not only in the shul and study hall, but also in the matrix of day-to-day life. If we have not been able to fulfill this to the extent to which we desire, it is in great part due to the fact that our brethren who think like us have not come here to help us build the Jewish society that we prefer.

Joseph Tabory, 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

[4] A Touch of Wisdom, A Touch of Wit
A certain wealthy Chasid came to R' Yitzchak of Worka (Poland). This Chasid was known to be extremely miserly. He did not even spend money on himself and lived on little more than bread and water.
R' Yitzchak rebuked him and said:
"If Hashem has blessed you with wealth, you have to live well and must eat meat and fish, and drink wine."
The Chasidim present were astonished. When the man left they asked R' Yitzchak:
"Rebbe, why did you rebuke him in this fashion? What difference does it make if he doesn't eat meat and drink wine?"
"It's not for him that I said what I said," explained R' Yitzchak, "but for the poor. If he eats meat and drinks wine, he will give the poor some bread to eat. However, if he himself eats only bread, what will there be left for him to give to the poor?"

"There isn't a thing in this world for which one cannot find an imitation or copy. The only exception to this is the truth, because there is no such thing as an imitation of the truth." —R' Mendel of Kotsk

"The easiest thing to do is write; the hardest is to erase." —R' Yisrael of Salant

Shmuel Himelstein has written a wonderful series for ArtScroll: Words of Wisdom, Words of Wit; A Touch of Wisdom, A Touch of Wit; and" Wisdom and Wit" — available at your local Jewish bookstore (or should be).
Excerpted with the permission of the copyright holder

[5] Parsha Points to Ponder -for BALAK
1) The Torah relates that G-d would not grant Bil'am permission to curse the Jewish people (see 22:12). Why didn't G-d permit him to do so and then simply stop the curse from having any effect on the Jewish people?
2) Why did G-d perform the seemingly unnecessary miracle of Bil'am's donkey speaking?
3) How could Bil'am and Balak have thought that simply their speech could obliterate the Jewish people after all they had heard and seen G-d do for this people?

Last week's Parsha Points to Ponder (CHUKAT)

(1) CORRECT WORDING OF QUESTION: Why did G-d instruct Moshe to speak to the rock in this week's Parsha but he was told to hit the rock in Parshat Beshalach (see Sh'mot 17:1-7)

Rav Hirsch explains that in the beginning of the sojourn in the desert, it was important for the people to experience Moshe's greatness as he ascended to the position of leadership. Therefore, Hashem had Moshe take a more direct and active part in the miracle by hitting the rock. At the end of the 40 years, the Jewish people had to be weaned off of Moshe's leadership and to experience G-d's intervention. Therefore, Moshe was instructed to speak to the rock which would clearly display that it is G-d's strength and power which provides for them.

(2) When the Jews complained about their situation in the desert, G-d punished them by killing them with snakes. (21:6) How did this fulfill G-d's approach to punish measure for measure?

Commentaries explain that since the snake was punished for speaking evil in B'reishit, it is used to punish the Jews for speaking evil about Hashem and Moshe. Furthermore, the snake for whom everything tastes like dust as a result of its sin, is fitting to use to punish those who complained about the manna which changed to any desired taste.

(3) When the Jews were killed by snakes, Moshe ended the plague by placing a snake on a staff and having the people look (see 21:8-9). Why did G-d command Moshe to use the same thing which killed as the cure instead of using something sacred?

I once heard the following answer. It is critical for people to learn to confront things which we fear and not to run away from them. In Sh'mos, Moshe's staff turned into a snake and Moshe ran from it. G-d told him to go back and grab the snake he feared. Moshe did so and it turned back into a staff (see Sh'mos 4:1-5). This approach was the key to Moshe's survival throughout all of his difficulties. Moshe now teaches that same lesson to the Jewish people by using the snake to cure the people. The goal is to take the very thing which you fear and transform it into something positive and a source of strength.

Parsha Points to Ponder is prepared by Rabbi Dov Lipman of Beit Shemesh ppp@israelcenter.co.il • Answers will appear in the next issue of TT, Beginning this week or next, answers to the current sedra's Parsha Points to Ponder will appear in the same issue

[6] Torah From Nature
JERBOA
small jumping desert rodent of Asia and northern Africa that resembles a mouse with a long tufted tail and very long hind legs... small forelegs are not used for locomotion. In general, Asiatic jerboas have five toes on their hind feet and African jerboas have three; the shapes of their ears vary widely between species.

Jerboa fur is long, soft and silky. Diet varies considerably: some are specialist seed, insect, or plant eaters, others are omnivores... Their ability to hop is presumed to be an adaptation to help them escape from predators, and perhaps to assist with the longer journeys a desert-living animal must make to find food. It is interesting to note that although jerboas are not closely related to the hopping mice of Australia or the kangaroo rats of North America, all three groups... have a similar set of adaptations to life in the deep desert... Jerboas are nocturnal. During the heat of the day, they shelter in burrows... different species make different kinds of burrows... temporary burrows are plain tubes: those used to escape from predators during the night are just 10 to 20 cm deep, unsealed and not camouflaged; temporary daytime burrows are well-hidden and sealed with a plug of sand to keep heat out and moisture in... Permanent burrows are also sealed and camouflaged, and often have multiple entrances... much more elaborate with a nesting chamber... winter burrows have food storage chambers... and a hibernation chamber... Perhaps the best-known species is the Lesser Egyptian Jerboa (Jaculus jaculus), one of the few species of jerboa found in Israel (Yarboa Gadol)... does not drink at all, relying on its food to provide enough moisture for survival... aestivates (a form of hibernation) during the hottest summer months, and has the ability to leap more than a metre to escape a predator.

[7] MicroUlpan
A storage room or closet for food is called, in English, a PANTRY.
In Hebrew? M'ZAVEH.
Fruit basket for serving fruit. KELET.
And here's a good one. You know those little fluted pieces of paper that make a little holder for chocolates or little cookies, petit fours, etc. SALSILA.
One more. Chocolates with something in them - cherries, nuts, cream... MULYA.

[8] Pirkei Avot
Following the list of 10 items that were created in the instant before the first Shabbat (Avot 5:9, mishnayot numbering varies in different editions of Avot), there are a few other items that "some say" were also created then, including AL TZVAT BITZVAT ASUYA, lit. tongs made with tongs. This can be explained as follows:
G-d provided mankind with an abundance of raw materials in this world. So too, he created humans with the intelligence to use the raw materials in many creative ways. But brain-power and material are often just not enough to produce a desired result. The first pair of tongs represents an additional helping hand from G-d to facilitate human progress. You can make tongs by holding a piece of metal in a fire and then shaping the pliable metal in the shape of tongs. But who made the first pair of tongs? This mishna suggests that G-d provided that (and similar objects) in addition to all that He created. Or, at least, (at best?) endowed the human being with that combination of insight, inspiration, ingenuity, spark of creativity, ability to think out of the box... that allows us to accomplish so much.

[9] G'matriya Twins
VAYOMER BILAM EL BALAK B'NEI LI BA-ZEH SHIVA MIZBACHOT V'HA'CHEN LI BAZEH SHIVA PARIM V'SHIVA EILIM:
Biil'am's plan to build altars and make sacrifices in order to be allowed to curse Bnei Yisrael cannot succeed, because of our command to bring korbanot, as it says:
U'S'EIR IZIM ECHAD CHATAT MILVAD OLAT HATAMID MINCHATA V'NISKA: (G'matriya Twins)

[10] About BALAK
BALAK was a descendant of Lot (Bamidbar Raba). RUTH was the daughter of EGLON (a later king of Moav), who was the son of BALAK (G'mara - Sota). As reward for the 42 korbanot that wicked BALAK brought, he merited to have RUTH descend from him (G'mara Nazir). [Because of the 42 korbanot, 42 children were attacked and mauled by bears (from the same G'mara Sota, reference to Melachim Bet 2:24)]. BALAK was a superior conjurer and diviner to BIL'AM (Bamidbar Raba). The Zohar says that BALAK was a descendant of YITRO, but did not want to convert to Judaism. BALAK was the father of KOZBI, an exceedingly beautify woman (Midrash Agada Bamidbar).

[11] Divrei Menachem
Parshat Balak reminds us - once again - of the sickly efforts that the nations of the world are prepared to undertake in order to undermine the integrity of the Jewish people. We just have to look at the lengths to which Balak b. Tzippor, King of Moab, takes to entice the arch sorcerer Bila'am to curse Bnei Yisrael pending their entry to Eretz Yisrael.

Initially, Bila'am refuses to go along with Balak's plans, ostensibly on account of G-d's injunction to him not to curse a people that are blessed. And all the gold and silver in Balak's coffers will not lure him to do so. Moreover, after much badgering from Balak, G-d even allows Bila'am to accompany Balak's princes.

Yet when he does "go along" with those very prestigious leaders, G-d is so angry that he places an angel in front of Bila'am to confuse him (cf. B'midbar 22:20-23). What happened? Was it greed? Was Bila'am going to disobey G-d after all?

Ramban notes that having made his previous declarations of loyalty to G-d, Bila'am should have reiterated them as a condition of his now being seen in the presence of Moab. His silence, however, symbolized acquiescence to the evil mission, even as he could only repeat what G-d would put into his mouth. Clearly, such sharing of company with Israel's enemies is reason enough to arouse G-d's ire. It should be of concern to us too.

Shabbat Shalom, Menachem Persoff