Q: Two brothers inherit a two-family house. Reuven wants to sell it. Shimon wants to keep it, but he cannot afford buying out Shimon’s part. Can Shimon force Reuven to remain in partnership and not sell the house? A: If this is an actual case, we must clarify a few points. Firstly, we cannot give a definitive answer without hearing both sides. This is not only a procedural matter. Details, which either side may overlook, can surface during a joint discussion in a way that changes a ruling. Also, it is best for the sides to work out the matter among themselves. Yet, it is important to know halachic guidelines, as upstanding Jews should use them as the point of departure when trying to arrive at a fair solution that satisfies the basic needs of both. It is in this spirit that we provide the following information. When two or more people inherit an estate, their relationship is like that of business partners for most matters, including the right to end the partnership (Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 171:1). One difference is that people’s agreement to enter a joint venture for a set time may include an obligation not to breakup the venture prematurely (see ibid. 176:15). Because inheritors become partners by the death of a joint relative, not by agreement, and for an open- ended time-period, each has the right to end the partnership. The question is how to do this in a given case. The optimal way to break up the partner- ship is to divide the property proportion- ally among the partners. However, there is a feasibility check of that arrangement (ibid. 171:1). Each side must be left with a portion that can be used for the same function as the entire unit was. The smaller parts must be similar enough to the original property to be called by the same name. Thus, regarding a field, the divided parts must be known as a field and not a garden (ibid.:3). In the case of living quarters, a house would have to be broken up into pieces that would each be called a house and be fit to use as complete living quarters. Where halacha does not deem it feasible to divide the property, the next-best system is known as GUD-O-AGUD (ibid. :6). This system, which is disputed by Amora'im in Bava Batra (13a), means that Shimon challenges Reuven to either buy out Shimon’s part or allow Shimon to buy him out. The Rama (ibid. :7) even allows Shimon to make a challenge at a higher than market-value price. If Reuven does not want to pay more than the property is worth, Shimon gets the chance to buy at that higher price. However, if Shimon is not capable of buying, he cannot force Reuven to buy his part. When neither side is interested in buying out his partner, and the property cannot be feasibly divided, two systems remain. The preferable one is to rent out the property to a third party and split the profits (Shulchan Aruch and Rama, ibid. :8). Where the property does not lend itself to being rented out, the two can share time usage of the property. In the case of living quarters, they each get a turn of a year at a time. Each of these alternatives has details that determine if and how the given alternative should be carried out. We do not have enough details to provide exact guidelines. Your procedural alternatives are basically as follows. You can use these guidelines to help you come to a mutual agreement. If, as it sounds, the property can be broken up into two living units in a practical manner, then if one of you prefers that arrangement, that is what should be done. Reuven cannot force Shimon to buy the house if he does not want to for whatever reason. Renting it out is halachically and probably practically a better idea than time-sharing. If you cannot reach an agreement, it is perfectly respectable to go to a Beit Din to examine the claims in detail. It is regrettable for siblings to reach the point of anger and recriminations before ending up in Beit Din. One might still prefer the more intimate forum of a Rav knowledgeable in monetary law, than a formal Beit Din. 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 The 37 intermittent years seem to have passed without any event worthy of mention. Day after day passed, adding up to weeks, months, and years. All we get in between the aftermath of Parshat Korach and the death of Miriam are the mitzvot of Para Aduma and Tum'at Meit, which, according to the Midrash, were actually given on the day of the dedication of the Mishkan. But it is during these years that Moshe Rabbenu and the Jewish people became intimately connected with one another. Up to this point the Israelites had lived from crisis to crisis. Now they developed the routine of daily manna collection and the study of God's Torah from Moshe and the elders. They were able to focus on the details of the mitzvot and contemplate their significance and proper fulfillment. While the desert was hardly a preparation for the independent life they would be leading in Israel, this experience imbued them with a new perspective of what life is all about, both personally and nationally. These years are well represented by the Para Aduma, which teaches that man is ultimately redeemed from the defilement of death, and kal vachomer from the setbacks of life. Daily efforts to do what is right, to fulfill God's mitzvot, add up to a human existence worthy of man who was created in His image. Yes, there is a great deal of confusion in life. Yet, all in all we slowly move in the direction of being worthy of entering God's promised land as God's chosen people. Rabbi Menachem Schrader, Efrat "Common courtesy requires a person who wants a
favor to go to the person from whom he wants the favor." 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? 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? Many Sifrei Mussar point out that while what Korach did was based on jealousy, his goal was to be in a position where he could be closer to Hashem. Thus, the great Moshe Rabbeinu should have held back somewhat in his chastising of Korach. (2) Why did Korach's sin warrant the introduction of a new form of capital punishment (being swallowed alive by the ground - see 16:32 and a flame consuming the people - see 16:35) instead of one of the standard methods of execution according to Torah law? The Belzer Rebbe, zt"l, explained that if they were killed by Beit Din or died through some natural plague, it would still have been possible to suggest that Korach's platform was correct. Perhaps people would have said that they received the punishment because they acted improperly in shaming a Jewish leader. The supernatural deaths, however, made a clear statement that Korach and his cohorts were wrong. (3) Following the death of Korach and his cohorts, all of the tribes were told to put staffs into the Mishkan and only Aharon's sprouted (17:16-24). Suddenly, everyone is comfortable with Aharon as the Kohein Gadol. Why weren't the Jews satisfied by the miracle of the fire pans and the punishment of Korach and why did the staff incident pacify them? After Korach died, people still suspected nepotism in the selection of Aharon as the Kohein Gadol. The Chizkuni points out that three words are used to describe the miracle of the staff - PERACH, TZITZ, AND SHEKEIDIM (17:23). These allude to the fact that that young priests (Pirchei Kehuna - similar to Perach) who emerge from Aharon will wear the tzitz and will perform their jobs with resolve (Shokdim similar to shekeidim). Thus, Hashem was making a final declaration that Aharon is His chosen Kohein. 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 Females will sometimes breed as soon as two days
after giving birth... more comfortable and graceful in the water, they will
often search for better food on land... adults have few predators - young
have many. Four years of age is considered old for coypus. One explanation is that Shmuel HaKatan was known
to quote this pasuk often in reproach of those who committed this common
error, of rejoicing in the down fall of their foes. One who adopts a pasuk
as a creed, it is as if he authored that pasuk. One can be thankful that his
enemy has failed, but to rejoice in that can be seen as a sign of arrogance,
as if one feels more deserving of victory than the other. G-d can sympathize
(so to speak) with the other fellow and allow him to prevail against you at
a future time. Maybe, to put you in your place for gloating. (Kahati
plus...) A: Your afterthought question is probably more significant than you think but even so, the feelings on the loss of a sibling are very often minimized for the very reasons that you give. i.e. spouse, children , grandchildren etc. so why am I carrying on so much? A sibling plays a very special role in one’s life. No one else shares the history you both do. No one else has known you as long as your brother or sister (unless your parents are still alive, but it’s different). No one else shares the memories of your childhood (positive or negative) and no one probably knows you as well. They knew you as a child in a way that no one who knows you now as an adult does. They knew the family jokes and the family struggles. The fun times and the difficult ones. Brothers and sisters influence each others lives in very fundamental ways: they are a part of your formative past and an important part of your roots to that past. When your sibling died you lost someone who had been in your life for a very long time. A constant in your life is gone. This alone can make you feel insecure and anxious. Their death can make you feel older – the family
has dwindled. You are the last one left from those you started out with.
Very unsettling, to say the least. If your relationship with them was close you’ll miss them terribly. If it wasn’t as good as you would have a wanted , you’ll likely feel regret and perhaps some guilt and of course sadness. The fact is that there may be little recognition from others as to the importance of the loss to you. While your sister was likely a pivotal person in your life, the other members of your family may not recognize it. They may not understand your grief and may not help you in the way you would expect them to if they felt the loss as you have. So all in all, it’s easy to understand why you’re experiencing all those feelings connected with any loss in addition to the specific ones mentioned here. Those feelings are very normal. You lost someone who had a special place in your life and you need time to deal with it. Your sister will always be a part of your life and because of that special connection the intenseness of the loss will take time to abate. Talk about her – perhaps with her children or even your children. Share the feelings related to the loss of a sibling. Tell them what you miss most, how it was growing up with her ( the positive and the negative). Reminisce, share your feelings, and above all give yourself time to mourn. At some point you may want to perpetuate her memory -- perhaps by donation to a cause that would be meaningful to both of you or by taking on a chesed project or by attending a shiur in her memory. A Nechama counselor is always available if you should feel the need to call. NECHAMA is a non-profit organization that provides
counseling for those who have lost a loved one. Call (02) 573-4413 or (02)
651-8319. To address a question to NECHAMA, email:
counselor@nechamaisrael.org Despite the fact that the nations of the world taunt us for this irrationality (cf. Rashi, B'midbar 19:2), we are expected to uphold this command obediently. According to the Midrash, Hashem actually revealed the reason to Moshe - but to him alone. Even the wise King Solomon had to admit that, 'I said I will get wisdom, but it was far from me." Following this line of discussion, we are troubled by the fact that Moshe, having been told to speak to the rock to produce water (ibid 20:8) is later punished for disobeying G-d. For Moshe strikes the rock rather than speaking to it. It seems that even the most pious can err. Later, in another episode, Moshe listens unquestionably to the command to make a material serpent to cure the people: He had learned his lesson, notes Rabbi Julius Baker. There is a very fine line between absolute obedience to G-d and doing what appears right in our subjective eyes. The art is in recognizing the source of the directive. Shabbat Shalom, Menachem Persoff [The Parshat Chukat Homepage]
|
