HALACHIC TIMES 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. This Shabbat we bench
Rosh Chodesh Iyar, which will be on Monday and Tuesday. Nissan has
30 days in our fixed calendar, therefore Iyar's Rosh Chodesh is two
days. Iyar has 29 days in our fixed calendar. The term K'doshim is applied to people who died sanctifying G-d's name, and this includes any Jew who died because he was a Jew. All victims of the Holocaust are K'doshim. But let's apply the term K'doshim - in the context of this week's sedra - to people who behaved in such a way, during the most terrible of dark times for the Jewish people, that we can see their superhuman efforts to strive for holiness, when they had ample reason to abandon that quest... and a lot more. Rabbi Ephraim Oshry z"l was a rav in the Kovno ghetto. He survived the Holocaust and published many Sh'eilot & T'shuvot from those terrifying years, and stories of a spiritual heroism that gives us a glimpse as to what it means to be part of G-d's "Kingdom of Kohanim and Holy Nation". These are some of the
people who show us what K'doshim Tih-yu means: Rabbi Oshry's full work
contains hundreds of Responsa from the ghetto prior to and during
the Holocaust. Each question is a testament to the remark- able
character of the individual Jew and the Jewish People, who would not
abandon their belief, faith, and commitment to G-d, no matter what
was happening to them. [P> X:Y (Z)] and [S>
X:Y (Z)] indicate start of a parsha p’tucha or s’tuma respectively.
X:Y is Perek:Pasuk of the beginning of the parsha; (Z) is the number
of p'sukim in the parsha. Korbanot must be offered in the Beit HaMikdash in a proper and pleasing manner. Specifically, one must keep to the time limits presented for eating sacred meat [215,L131 19:8]. Violation carries a death penalty from heaven. Watch this next set of mitzvot: Leave the corner of your field uncut, so that poor people might come and find grain to reap [216,A120 19:10]; do not reap your entire field [217,A210 19:9]. A positive mitzva and a prohibition that basically say the same thing. Here's another pair: Leave the gleanings of the field for the poor [218,A121 19:10]; do not take the gleanings [219,L211 19:9]. And then these two pairs of mitzvot are doubled again - each pair of mitzvot is counted separately as applied to a vineyard [220-223; A123-124 ,L212-213 19:9-10]. One senses that the Torah is using this compounding of mitzvot to emphasize at least two aspects of these mitzot: [1] that we are not the real owners of the land - G-d is and we are the land's guardians. We must do His bidding without "cutting corners" (Pun intended, but don't let your groan block out the message of the mitzvot.) [2] that poor people have to be taken proper care of, by following the mitzvot and being inspired to do even more for them. Stealing [224,L244 19:11], denying holding that which belongs to someone else [225,L248 19:11], and swearing to that effect [226,L249 19:11] are all forbidden. Swearing falsely [227,L61 19:12] is forbidden. Two observations: "A" lent "B" his camera and later B denies that he has A's camera, and then swears that he doesn't have it. One might think that there are two violations here. But actually, there are three. Mitzva [226] overlaps both [225] and [227]. Second observation: Swearing falsely is different from swearing in vain. Both are serious prohibitions. Take the following example as an interesting distinction between the two. If someone swears (with G-d's name) that a banana is an apple, that is NOT a false oath; it is an oath in vain. Of course, it is not true that the banana is an apple, but everyone knows that and can see it for himself. The oath did not falsely convince anyone that it was an apple. Such an oath is a frivolous misuse of G-d's name and the sanctity of an oath and is a violation of "Thou shalt not take G-d's name in vain". A false oath is one that people accept as truth, since they have no first-hand knowledge of the issue. When the lie deceives others, then there is falsehood. That the Torah says one who swears falsely disgraces G-d's name by doing so, is echoed by Rambam when he distinguishes between "serious" sins and "light" sins. Rambam puts into the serious category all sins that carry a death penalty... and swearing falsely. So destructive are false and vain oaths to the underpinnings of society, that it is placed with the capital offenses, even though false oaths are not, per se, capital offenses. Withholding someone's property [228, L247 19:13], robbery [229,L245 19:13], and delaying payment of a laborer [230,L238 19:13] are prohibited. Most people would probably rationalize the situation and not consider delaying payment as a form of theft. The Torah implies that one is (can be?) as serious as the other. Something to consider concerning the prohibition of delaying payment to a worker (and the positive mitzva to pay on time). There are many situations in our everyday life where this mitzva- pair are present, usually without our realizing it. You take a taxi ride. Paying the fare at the end of your ride is a mitzva. The taxi driver has worked for you and you are obligated to pay him on time and not to delay payment. In such a mundane situation, one hardly thinks of the mitzva, nor does one run afoul of these commandments - so have KAVANA for these mitzvot when you pay the driver. So too, when you take a haircut (not to mention that during S'fira), hire a babysitter, etc. It is forbidden to
curse a fellow Jew [231,L317 19:14]; and one may not place a
stumbling block before the blind [232,L299 19:14], meaning [not
exclusively] that one may not mislead or entrap others. Care must be
taken not to mislead anyone, even inadvertently. This can include
stretching the truth or saying something that is not actually a lie,
but it will convey to others that which is not really so. (Helping
someone do the wrong thing is part of this prohibition - even if the
other knows what he's doing and wants to do it anyway.) Technically, this positive command is directed to the judges and courts. However, the individual Jew must draw from these mitzvot the importance of being fair and apply some of these rules on an informal basis, to everyday life. Parents, teachers, employers, and others are often in a position to "judge" other people and situations. Neither gossip nor slander (regardless of whether what you say is true or false) [236,L301 19:16]; do not stand by while your fellow is in danger of life, limb, or property [237,L297 19:16]. Do not hate your fellow Jew in your heart [238,L302 19:17]; reproach SENSITIVELY your fellow [239,A205 19:17] being careful to avoid embarrassing him [240,L303 19:17] (even while reproaching him). Do not take revenge [241,L304 19:18] nor bear a grudge [242,L305 19:18]; "Love thy neighbor..." [243,A206 19:18] Notice the constant reminder: "I am G-d", or words to that effect. Being nice to others is not just nice; it is part of Torah and the fulfillment of G-d's commandments. It is forbidden to cross-breed animals of different species [244,L217 19:19], to sow mixed seeds [245,L215 19:19], and to wear Shaatnez, mixtures of wool and linen in a garment. Note that in this one pasuk, there is a forbidden animal-animal mix, a plant-plant mix, and an animal/plant mix, making the point (among others) that G-d allows us a dominance over nature but with restrictions and limits. Next we find the
complicated issue of the atonement for improper relations with a
maidservant who is partially freed and partially still a slave. Shaving the temple area of the head is forbidden [251, L43 19:27] as is shaving the face with a razor [252,L44 19:27]. These 2 prohibitions apply to men only. They are unique in that all other prohibitions apply to both men and women. (Actually, there are some other exceptions, but this is the classic example.) Permanent tattooing is forbidden [253,L41 19:28]. Protect your daughters from loose behavior. Keep the Shabbat and respect the place of the Mikdash (even when no Beit HaMikdash stands there) [254,A21 19:30]. Ov and Yid'oni (mediums and wizards) are forbidden [255,256; L8,9 19:31]. One must rise and otherwise respect the elderly and Torah scholars [257,A209 19:32]. This last parsha has
been purposely presented here as one run-on paragraph to give the
flavor of the way these mitzvot "fly at you" without the parsha-breaks
you might expect. One gets the feeling that there is something
holding these diverse mitzvot together. K'doshim Tih'yu, Be Holy,
perhaps. Here again we find a summary pasuk, this time focusing on K'dusha, holiness, rather than the keeping of mitzvot. Sanctify yourself and
be holy, says G-d, for I am HaShem your G-d. Cursing one's parents, even after their deaths, is forbidden [260,L318 20:9], a capital offense. The Torah next reiterates the forbidden relationships that were taught at the end of Parshat Acharei. They are all capital offenses. The specific death penalties vary, but it is in the context that Rambam learns the command to Sanhedrin to carry out the punishment of "internal burning" when called for [261,A208 20:14]. Rambam holds that each of the four death penalties is counted separately among the 613 mitzvot. Again, the Torah
commands us to preserve all of the mitzvot, thus preventing the Land
from expelling us. This raises the stakes, so to speak. We are
presented with a negative result if we fail to remain faithful to
G-d. G-d's plan for the People of Israel was/is to bring us to Eretz
Yisrael and there we will live lives of Torah and Mitzvot. We really
cannot say to Him, thanks for the Land, but no thanks as far as
commitment to mitzvot is concern. (Nor does it work vice versa.) In order to inherit the land of Israel, we must not behave in the abominable ways of nations who preceded us. We must distinguish between kosher and non-kosher animals (and life-styles); we must be holy and distinct from others. We are not automatically different from anyone else. Torah makes us different. Torah gives us our unique identities. Every Jew must play a dual role. We are each individuals and we are part of Klal Yisrael. We are exhorted to keep the Torah as individuals, but we are also "advised" to be faithful to G-d so that tragedies will not happen to the People of Israel as a whole. Maftir is the final 3
p'sukim. They make a powerful summary of all the mitzvot of
Acharei-K'doshim. There is a repeat of the command to be holy, and
the reason: that G-d is holy. And we find G-d's promise that He will
keep us apart from the other nations, to be His. [i] If the lender told his agent to work for the borrower, the lender is not deemed a lender/employee. His agent is the employee of the borrower. [j] A schoolteacher, doctor, scribe, lawyer, gardener, and the like who work for the community are deemed to be in the employ of all of the members of the community. If any of these workers loans an object to any member of the community, this is a case of special relationship since the worker is a lender and an employee of the borrower. If the worker is not required to put in a set amount of hours but may come at his pleasure, he is not deemed to be in the employ of the members of the community. Conversely, if the worker borrowed from a member of the community, the lender is not considered in the employ of the worker. [k] A craftsman who is hired by Reuven to manufacture or repair an object for Reuven is deemed to be in his employ until the object is completed. Thus, if the craftsman lends an object to Reuven, this is a case of special relationship. However, if Reuven engages an independent contractor to manufacture or to repair an object, and the independent contractor lends an object to Reuven, this is a case of special relationship if the independent contractor happened to be working on the object when he loaned a different object to Reuven. lf he was not working on Reuven's object when he loaned an object to Reuven, he is not considered to be in the employ of Reuven for the purposes of special relationship. [l] The appointed rabbi, judge, or sexton of a community who is on call at all times to officiate at events and to answer questions of ritual is considered to be an employee of every member of the community If he lends an object to any member of the community, it is a case of special relationship. However, if he is not required to be on call at all times but rather at specific times, he is In the employ of the members of the community only during those hours, and only if he lends an object during those hours to a member of the community is this a case of special relationship. Conversely, if he borrows from a member of the community, such member is not deemed to be in his employ and the laws of special relationship do not apply. [m] The cantor of the community is deemed to work for all of the members of the community during the time that he is engaged in performing his duties at the synagogue. [n] A housekeeper, maid, servant, butler, and the like are deemed to be in the employ of their employer at all times and thus if the housekeeper lends an object to the master of the house it is a case of special relationship. [o] The lender of the object was in the employ of the borrower when he borrowed the object for 30 days and left the employ of the borrower prior to the termination of the 30-day period. As seen in item [b] (last issue), this does not affect the special relationship. At the end of the 30 days, when the lender was no longer in the employ of the borrower, the borrower continued to hold on to the object that he borrowed, thus becoming a lessee. The relationship continues as one of special relationship. (The law is the same if the object is leased to the lessee while the lessor was employed by the lessee, or if the object is given to a bailorto watch while the owner of the object is in the employ of the bailee. Even if the owner of the object is no longer in the employ of the lessee when the term of the lease or the bailment terminates, the special relationship continues if the object continues to be held by the lessee or the bailee.) This assumes that there is no interruption of the holding of the object and the holding continues uninterrupted from the borrowing to the lease; it is true although the owner of the object was not in the employ of the borrower turned lessee when the borrowing changed into a lease. This holds true even if the intended second holding was for 30 days and then the borrower continued to hold the object for another 30 days; the special relationship is still present based on the original special relationship, since there has been no interruption in the holding of the object. This is true even if the object was loaned by the lender for the 30-day period and the borrower continues to hold the object as a lessee. However, if the change was from a lessee to that of a borrower, then there is a minority opinion that the special relationship does not continue beyond the first 30-day period since the owner was not then in the employ of the lessee turned lender. Also if the original holding of the object was that of a borrower and then as a lessee and the third holding is also that of a lessee, then the third holding cannot be attached to the first holding, so that the third holding does not have the status of special relationship. The first borrowing for 30 days was made without the lender being in the employ of the borrower. When the 30 days were terminated, the lender was hired by the borrower or was already in the employ of the borrower; the second borrowing qualifies as a special relationship although there was no interruption of the holding of the object by the borrower. [p] All of the laws
dealing with special relationship apply if the borrower does not use
the borrowed object other than in the manner for which it was
borrowed. If used in another manner, the special relationship does
not exist and the borrower is liable as if he willfully destroyed
the object, for which he is always liable. In the marriage relationship, ordinarily a husband has the use, but not the owner- ship, of assets, both real estate and personal property, belonging to his wife. The husband who has the use of the wife's assets during their marriage is considered to be in a special relationship regarding these assets. But if she borrows from him, it is not deemed to be a special relationship. The subject matter of
this lesson is more fully discussed in volume IX chapters 346 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 "CHADASH",
Prohibition on Eating New Grain Crop "Talk to the children of Israel and say to them, when you come into the land which I give you, and you reap its crop, bring an OMER of the first of your reaping to the Kohen... And don't eat bread, flour or wheat kernels until this very day, until you bring the offering of your God, an eternal law for all your generations in all of your settlements" (Vayikra 23:10,14). The word "first" of your reaping reminds us of the same word used to describe CHALLAH and TRUMAH, mitzvot where a small amount of the dough or of the new crop are dedicated to Hashem and thus make the entire remainder permissible to eat. Here also on a national scale, the entire new crop of grain is permitted until a small amount is dedicated to Hashem by bringing it as an offering in the Mikdash (Sefer Hachinukh mitzva 303). The OMER is made from barley flour, an inferior flour not usually suitable for Temple offerings. There is a practical reason for this, since the barley ripens early and the wheat is not yet ripe at Pesach time. We explained in previous columns that the mitzva to bring the OMER from barley, together with the counting of the OMER which anticipates the offering of the two wheat loaves at Shavuot when the wheat is ripe, carries a unique message of balance in worship: On the one hand, Hashem is willing to accept our service even if it is less than perfect, if that is all we are able to offer Him. But this is not an excuse for complacency; such service is acceptable only if we conspicuously display our eagerness to serve Him in the proper and perfect way, by prominently showing our anticipation of the day when we will overcome all obstacles to serving Him properly. "EVERYTHING NEW IS
FORBIDDEN BY THE TORAH" Regarding some new
customs which were instituted for the purpose of outreach, he writes
that while we are naturally suspicious of anything new and
unfamiliar, once we succeed in elevating part of such an innovation
to Hashem's service we have shown that it can contribute to
holiness, and we may consider it permissible (Maamrei HaRayah, "HaOmer
v'Shtei HaLechem" pg. 474). Righteousness &
Kingship [8] Why on Shavuot [2]? Gleaning, 'Leket', is one of 'Mat'not Aniyim' the gifts of the poor that are part of Jewish agriculture and by implication, part of our attitude and law to having and spending money. The aspect of Shavuot as Chag HaBikurim is the foundation that makes them more than elements of charity. This obligation to bring Bikurim, the first fruits of the year, to the Temple is made by the Viduy into something far more important spiritually and religiously than an agricultural thanksgiving, even more important than an expression of gratitude for G-d's blessings. The Jewish farmer is obligated at the moment of his economic success to eradicate any feeling of ownership over the fruits of his labor and capital, by the five verses describing who the real owner and source of his wealth is. [The first four of these verses form the kernel of the Pesach Hagada, teaches the same idea]. The tribes of Israel go down to enslavement in Egypt, are powerless to free themselves and only can be redeemed by Hashem, who brings them to their Land and gives them its fruits. The farmer bringing his first fruits is taught thereby, that in Judaism there is no such thing as a self-made individual and that is the first defense against economic immorality. These gifts of the poor are in effect the rent or fee, or dividend that is owed to Hashem the real owner. Rabbi S. R. Hirsch explains the injunction against interest as recognition that part of our wealth is granted to us as guardians to assist others, so that it is immoral to charge the debtors for the use of something that Hashem meant for them. The injunctions to the farmer not to gather Matnot Aniyim for himself are regular prohibitions and so are subject to the same disciplinary action by the Beit Din for their infringements, thus making charity part of the coercive nature of Jewish welfare policies. They, like tzedaka - the same grammatical root as tzedek -justice - are not left to the kindheartedness or philanthropy of the giver but rather to taxation, to their obligatory payments, to G-d the owner and source of all our wealth. In Pe'ah, the legally acquired and recognized property rights of the farmer are temporally waived; he is not even permitted to harvest and then distribute that part of the crop to the poor according to his own discretion. Matnot Aniyim are the property of the poor and any infringement of their rights is gezel (theft). Yet they are not gifts brought to the poor but rather something that they have to seek out, gather and bring home them- selves; this would make work by the poor while they are receiving welfare, part of the system. This militates against the creation of a welfare mentality whereby living on handouts and charity become a way of life for the recipients. This mentality has immoral and unhealthy consequences both for the recipients and society at large. Leading to bread and circuses as part of national budgets, it erodes the work ethic of a society, creates social tensions and is often a cause of tax evasion by the rich and inflationary pressures. The autonomous Jewish community of Padua [16th century Italy], finding welfare payment excessive decided that welfare recipients would be required to carry out the duties of visiting the sick - communal services, otherwise they would be struck off the welfare rolls. Judaism sees tzedaka as the obligation of the holders of wealth but not the entitlement of the poor. "A person should flay a carcass in public [considered the lowest of menial labors] rather than depend on charity." At the same time, the giver has to make sure that there is nothing in the manner of giving, that is insulting or causes sorrow to the poor or that can only add to their suffering. See how careful Boaz is to make Ruth's work of gleaning free of sorrow and difficulties. He tells her to be sure that she drinks of the water provided for the reapers [a common courtesy granted in recognition of the heat of the Israeli summer], to eat the food provided by custom to the workers and not to fear the taunts and remarks of the reapers who he has cautioned against misbehavior against the widow from Moav. So we find in Rambam's Hiklkhot Matnot Aniyim, the hours for gleaning, staggered according to the needs of the young children, nursing mothers, and the elderly people who came to gather them. He and all the Codes lay down the necessity of giving tzedaka with respect, consideration and humility; our precaution against the creation of a soulless and inhuman bureaucracy dispensing welfare. Shavuot is indeed a
fitting time to read Megilat Rut with its depiction of gathering in
Matnot Aniyim. In the list of festivals in Parshat Emor we find that
the laws of Pe'ah are included even though they do not relate to a
festival. There they are placed between Shavuot, Chag HaBikurim and
Rosh HaShana, Day of Judgment.Indeed, a person filled with pride and
satisfaction at reaping the results of his work and investments,
needs to learn through Pe'ah who the real owner of wealth is and to
whom success really is due, before he can come to the Seat of
Judgment. Q: Is it permitted to fold the pages of a sefer to make it easier to find a certain page, in place of a bookmark? A: We have not found a discussion of this particular question, but various sources and ideas on the topic of treating sefarim respectfully should enlighten the matter. The general laws of respect for sifrei Torah are discussed in a few places, including Orach Chayim 154 and Yoreh Deah 282. It is accepted that they apply to printed Torah sefarim of various sorts (see Pitchei Teshuva 282:8; Mishna Berura 154:31), although they are on a lower level of kedusha. The basic question is whether a sefer should be used for a Torah-related use, when an unholy object could be used to do the same thing. The Taz (YD 282:13) forbids using one sefer to raise another one to make it easier to learn from, because he is using something holy for a use for which “wood or stone” works just as well. One can claim that using a sefer’s page as its own bookmark is likewise objectionable. In one way it is better in that the sefer is being used for the purpose of its own use, not to service a different object. Nevertheless, the Taz’s claim that the use of a sefer instead of a mundane object, despite the noble gain intended, is problematic seems to apply. On the other hand, the Taz is probably not grounds to outlaw the practice of folding pages. The Magen Avraham (Yoreh Deah 154:14) argues with the Taz and allows one to bring over a sefer in order to prop up another sefer. His main source is the gemara (Megilla 26b) that one may move over a bima to a place where its presence will prevent tuma (impurity) from entering a beit knesset. One can learn the Magen Avraham in a limiting manner, allowing use of a holy object only if it is not clear why one is bringing it over. However, the context and language of the Chayei Adam (31:48) and Mishna Berura (154:31) indicate that they understand the Magen Avraham in an inclusive manner that applies to our case and agree with him. Nor do they mention that it is permissible only when no other alternative is available. In other words, if the use is not in and of itself degrading to the sefer and the fact that it is being used at all is to aid in a mitzva-oriented activity, it is permitted. If one does the folding carefully, one can all but eliminate the question. There is a machloket among poskim whether the margins of sefarim are holy. Although the margins of a sefer Torah are holy (see Magen Avraham 334:24), the Masat Binyamin (100) says that this applies only to holy parchments, which have a halachic requirement of a margin, not to printed materials. Even according to those who argue, the margins may only have the sanctity of a tashmish kedusha (something which serves a holy object, namely the book’s words) (Tzedaka U’mishpat 16:29 in the name of B’nei Yona). If that is the case, then it is logical that serving the holy text, by helping one find the place, is an appropriate use of the margin. Thus, even the Taz should allow folding the margin alone. (It should not make a difference if by doing so, some of the text is covered.) The remaining question is whether the bending of the page, which leaves a mark, is considered a bizayon (disgrace) for the sefer. Everyone agrees that a sefer should be cherished and preserved. For many, that means that one should be very careful that it not be creased or overly worn. Others feel that a worn looking gemara is a used looking gemara, and that is beautiful, not disgraceful. The fact is that there are many talmidei chachamim who fold the pages of their sefarim and many who do not, and we have no authority or interest to create new prohibitions that do not emerge clearly from classical sources. That being said, our orientation is that as long as bookmarks exist, they are preferable to folding the pages. Ed. note: Not that the Vebbe Rebbe needs my agreement, but I would like to echo the final sentence's sentiment. Independent of prohibitions, a sefer - even well-worn and often-used - should manifest our efforts at according it the high degree of respect it deserves. Folding pages or their corners, putting open s'farim face-down to hold a place, putting other things on top of them, throwing them... (some of the above are the subject of prohibitions), all show a lack of respect. 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 From A Candle by Day by
Rabbi Shraga Silverstein The idea of Galut as punishment - the Land of Israel 'spewing out' those who pollute it - appears first in this week's portion. That Eretz Israel by its very nature will not tolerate certain types of sin is explained by Rashi (Vayikra 18:28): "This may be compared to the case of a prince (i.e. a person of a sensitive physical nature) to whom one gives something disgusting to eat which he cannot retain in his stomach but vomits it out. Thus too, Eretz Israel is unable to retain sinners on its soil." Thus, over and above punishment - Galut is actually the natural consequence of sin in Eretz Israel. That is why, explains the Rav, "Halo khivnei khushiyim", with its message of hope and promise that Galut is only temporary, was chosen as the haftara. It reminds us that the Land of Israel itself will be faithful to all Jews who struggle through the lengthy night of Galut to retain their identity as Jews and their loyalty to Eretz Israel. Thus the haftara concludes: "In that day I will set up again the fallen sukka of David... I will restore My people Israel… And I will plant them upon their soil, nevermore to be uprooted from the soil I have given them - says the Lord your God." Rabbi Shalom Kurz, Beit
Shemesh On the day before the Pesach, R' Eisel went out to the market and saw the miser standing by the fire where he had burned all his bread. He was busy emptying out his pockets into the fire, in case there were any crumbs left in the linings. "You're wasting your time," R' Eisel told him. "There is no reason for you to have to empty your pockets." "Why?" said the miser. "Because," said R'
Eisel, "the law states that the only chametz we have to get rid of
is that which belongs to a Jew, and you're only a Jew up to your
pockets." Usually the male has a red or orange patch on its head and barred and spotted black or brown plumage with light underparts... Among the more than 200 species are the downy woodpecker, the larger hairy woodpecker, red-crested pileated woodpecker, or logcock, red- headed (popularized by Woody) and 3-toed woodpeckers, and the California woodpecker, which makes small holes in trees for storing acorns... The flickers, the only brown-backed woodpeckers, some- times capture insects on the ground... red-shafted flicker. The sapsuckers (including the famous yellow-bellied sap- sucker) may damage or kill trees by girdling them with small holes through which they eat some of the cambium and drink sap; they also feed on ants and wild fruit... The woodpecker family also includes the Old World wryneck, which does not peck wood... In addition to drilling into trees, pecking is also a means of communication to signal possession of territory to their rivals, and a method of echo-locating grubs under the bark of the tree... Of special interest is the ivory-billed wood- pecker, common name for the largest of the North American woodpeckers, Believed to be extinct ...shiny blue-black in color with extensive white markings on its wings and neck, this bird is distinguished by its pure white bill and by a prominent top crest, red in the male and black in the female... up to 2 ft. long (60cm.) with a 3 ft. wingspan...The ivory- bill woodpecker was rediscovered last week... It is very rare and endangered... but obviously not (yet) extinct. The rediscovery of the ivory-billed woodpecker (in the Big Woods of Arkansas) after 60 years of no reliable sightings, has been compared by ornithologists to finding the dodo or Elvis. (Almost so, but not quite.) The finding has brought
about a renewed enthusiasm in preserving the 550,000 acres of
bayous, bottom- land forests and oxbow lakes... "It's a very wild
and beautiful place"... Rabbi Julius Baker suggests that Kedusha is a matter of degree predicated not on the place in which one finds oneself but on the degree of preparation that goes into the religious act. Thus, it is not the Kohen Gadol's entry into the Kodesh HaKodashim, per se, that makes him "Kadosh". For every Jew, it is the devotion to the Mitzva (Kavana) that ultimately defines the level of Kedusha attained in its performance. The rabbis tell us that every Mitzva between Man and G-d needs Hachana (preparation), as it is written: "Prepare to meet your G-d, O Israel" (Amos 4:12). So even the Kohen Gadol will not enter Kodesh HaKodashim without preparation that includes proving his holiness in his daily dealings with people. Paradoxically, when we
perform a good deed for someone else, we are not expected to utter
any words of Hachana. For when we give charity, we do not keep the
recipient waiting. Nevertheless, it is precisely the rush to help
others that eventually takes us into the holiest of places. Lower Levels of
Impurity - Tum'at Midras Though Tum'at Midras may be defined as the degree of impurity which is conveyed to a chair, bed, couch, saddle etc. when the Zav & co. stands on, sits, lies, rides on, or leans against, it only takes effect if the object was specifically manufactured for and is usually used for that particular purpose. If an object was not originally made for that specific purpose - for sitting, lying on, etc. - it would not be contaminated if the Zav sat on it. The Gemara comments, "I might think if the Zav overturned a Se'ah - a barrel which can hold a Se'ah's measure - and sat on it… the barrel would become impure. Consequently it is written, 'And anything upon which he sits (shall be impure)'. This teaches us that only articles actually fashioned for that purpose become impure. Otherwise we can say to him - to the Zav - "Get up so we can do our business" (Shabbat 59a). An excellent example of the importance of "special intent" in Halacha, the susceptibility of every article or utensil to impurity is therefore judged by its primary function and the original intention of the manufacturer. Also an object specifically made to support the body in motion (e.g. a diving board) as opposed to the body at rest (e.g. chair) is not susceptible to impurity. Midras- impurity could be spread even without direct contact with the object. If a Zav caused pressure to be put upon such an object even if he did not physically touch it, he rendered the article impure. "If he sat on a bed and there were four cloaks under the four legs of the bed, they (all) become impure…" (Zavim 3: 7). "If there were ten cloaks, one above the other, and he sat on the topmost one, all are rendered impure" (Zavim 4:5). The Rambam writes, "…even if there were 100 cloaks or mattresses, they would be all rendered impure. Even if between the sleeping or sitting Zav and the bed… which was specifically made for sleeping… there were positioned heavy stones which weighed vastly more than he did, those objects (e.g. the bed under the stones etc.) would be rendered impure" (Hil. Metam'ei Mishkav Umoshav 6:5, Note Keilim 1:3). Vessels of stone,
earthenware, or utensils which have their origin from creatures of
the sea, birds or are firmly attached to the ground are not
susceptible to Midras- impurity. Vessels made of earthenware are not
susceptible to Midras-impurity but if a Zav put his finger inside
their airspace or touched their interior, he contaminated them. (We
have accepted the logic of Ra'avad's critique on Rambam. Rambam in
Hilchot Metam'ei Mishkav Umoshav 8:4 rules that, "If the Zav put his
hand or foot within the airspace of an earthenware vessel and did
not touch the (interior) side and did not cause it to move, it is
still pure." The basis of their disagreement is based on divergent
interpretations of deliberations found on Shabbat 82b.) Normally an
earthenware vessel can be contaminated only if the source of
impurity touches the interior of the vessel or enters its airspace.
(A Sheretz suspended by a string inside the vessel but not touching
the sides would still contaminate.) The ritually defiled
accouterments of the Zav, Zava, Nida, and Yoledet are impure for
seven days. But interestingly enough, there is no specific Biblical
sanction for the rabbinical ruling that the chair, bed, couch or
saddle upon which they sat are actually impure for seven days.
However, since the Torah does say that a ritually pure person who
touched their accouterments is rendered impure for one day, based on
other precedents, the Sages were able to logically conclude that the
accouterments indeed acquired a seven-day impurity. A person or
object that has a one-day impurity can not contaminate people or
vessels; he/it can only render impure food and liquids. <to be
continued> The word is not ELOHA. It is e-LO-ahhh or e-LOwahhh. Not ELOHA. There, it appeared again in this column. The report: people don't get it. The seem to refuse to believe it, or something. Anyone who reads this column and says e-LO-ak rather than ELOHA is hereby recruited to gently, politely, softly tell other people of your acquaintance so that more and more people will pronounce G-d's name correctly. And then there is the AMEN CHATUFA, the premature, early, you-said-it-too-soon AMEN. No matter how long a chazan drags out (stretches) the ending of a bracha, even if it feels like an invitation to say AMEN as he finishes the bracha, resist, hold back, wait. Your AMEN is a mitzva only when it FOLLOWS a bracha, not cuts into the bracha's ending. Again, people don't seem to get the point. Maybe they don't read this column. Maybe they think the points are too nit-picky to make the effort to change their habits. So, you who read this column, are hereby recruited (again) to help with the BASH campaign (break anti-halachic shul habits). Don't yell at anyone, be gentle, constructive, instructive, soft, polite in your reminders that AMEN should be said after the bracha ends. This avoids, tell others, the absurd- sounding, HAM'VAREICH ET AMO YISRA'EL BASHAMEIN. While we are talking about "bad" habits, how do you feel about the common song for HINENI MUCHAN UMZUMAN for S'firat HaOmer? K'MO SHEKATUV BATORAH, as it is written in the Torah, Hineni Muchan Umzuman. Guess what? That's not written in the Torah. We have to rework the melody so that it comes out straight. Anyway, let's move on to some other issues, using Parshat K'doshim as a source of the reviews. ELOHEI MASEICHA, molten gods. Under the ALEF woiuld be a CHATAF-SEGOL (five dots). When the conjunctive VAV is prefixed to the word, the result is a TZEIREI under the VAV and no vowel under the ALEF. The ALEF becomes virtually not there and the word is VEI-LO-HEI. Not V'ELOHEI. Vayikra 19:15, ... nor honor the person of the mighty... LO TEH-DAR P'NEI GADOL. The HEI of TEH-DAR has a SH'VA NACH under it, so the HEI is sounded, just as it would be (should be) at the end of a word when there is a MAPIK (dot) in it. TEHHH-DAR. Avoid TE-DAR. There are other words that have a HEI in the middle, and the HEI has no vowel under it. In that case, the HEI is silent, as if it were not there. The tribal leader of Menashe, as mentioned at the beginning of Parshat Bamidbar, is GAMLIEL b. P'DA-TZUR. There is a HEI after the DALET, but the HEI is unvoweled, so the name is not P'DAH-TZUR. In 19:34 is the command
to love a Ger. v'a-hav- TA LO, and you shall love him... Care must
be taken to accent the TA syllable, and not say v'a- HAV-ta LO, even
though the accent might have receded to the next-to-the-last
syllable by the "rule" of NASOG ACHOR. There is no NASOG ACHOR in
this situation and the word v'a-HA-tahas a different meaning, and
you loved (him). That's not what the pasuk says. In loving memory of
Malka Chana Roth HY"D murdered in the Sbarro bombing, 9 Aug. ‘01,
Donations are tax-deductible. Please check our website or call for
details. 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 The
Travel Desk or email to tiyul@israelcenter.co.il As madrich in Bnei Akiva in Crown Heights and Forest Hills, national advisor in NCSY, shul youth director of Adath Yeshurun in Kew Gardens and Young Israel of Queens Valley, teacher of Limudei Kodesh, math, science and computer at Yeshiva of Central Queens, and then Educational Director of the Israel Center, Phil has been sharing his love of Torah and worldly knowledge, the Jewish People and the Land of Israel with hundreds of students and colleagues for most of his life. Coming on Aliya in 1981 with his wife, Toni (Feltscher), and two of their daughters (Miri and Aviva; the third one, Ora, is their native-born Israeli - as are their three grandchildren, K"Y), Phil immediately transferred his NCSY and teaching activities to his position at the OU Israel Center, where he continues to spread Torah via shiurim, Torah Tidbits, and his weekly internet broadcast - Torah Tidbits Audio - on Israel National Radio. Torah Tidbits began as a one-sheet flier in 1992 and is now a weekly publication ranging from 44-60 pages with a distribution of well over 10,000, via the hard copy, email version, and on the OU website. Phil is proud of his
role at the Israel Center and of the role the Center plays as a
voice for Orthodoxy in Israel. Today the Israel Center is many
things to many people, he notes: programs for youth, outreach,
shiurim, tiyulim, Shabbatonim, Torah Tidbits, and more. But, through
all the different programming, he says, the goal is always the same
- "to strengthen the bond between the individual Jew and Torah, the
Land of Israel and the Jewish People. Perel, born and raised in the Bronx, received her undergraduate degree from Queens College in New York and her master's degree in audiology from the University of Pittsburgh. She taught deaf and hard-of-hearing children in St. Louis, New Orleans and Gainesville, Florida, before moving to Chicago. There her husband, whom she had married while they were both graduate students, became director of the Speech and Hearing Clinic at the University of Illinois Medical Center in Chicago. Perel was hired to computerize hearing tests at the Medical Center, where eventually she developed patient care systems and became assistant director of computer systems. In 1989, after 25 years in Chicago, Perel and Maurice moved to New Haven, Connecticut, where Perel became manager of technical services and patient care systems at Yale-New Haven Hospital. In 1993, Perel retired and the couple moved to Tucson, Arizona; six months later Maurice died. Beginning in 1994,
Perel made several trips to Israel on her own. In 1997, she made
Aliya. In 1998, she met and married Rabbi Yisrael Alexander Azaria. After the Center moved to its new building on Keren Hayesod, Perel endowed the Dr. Maurice E. Joseph Jewish Video Resource Center, perpetuating her first husband's memory with some of his interests - libraries, learning and Torah study. Through Perel's generosity, many Israel Center participants enjoy "lunch and learn" sessions by watching Torah-study videos in the library. Today Perel continues
to be a dedicated volunteer and supporter of the Israel Center - her
"home away from home." Living in Israel is the fulfillment of a
long-time dream: "I love living here," she says. BACKGROUND The first mishna in chapter 4 of Brachot contains a dispute between the Tana Kama (the first unnamed opinion in a Mishna-dispute) and R’ Yehuda as to when the deadline for Mincha is. The T”K says that one may daven Mincha until sunset. R’ Yehuda says that one may daven Mincha only until Plag Mincha. [PLAG is1¼ "halachic" hours before sunset. A halachic hour is a twelfth part of the day, calculated from s |
