Z'MANIM - HALACHIC
TIMES - Correct for TT #659 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. In our fixed calendar, when there are 2 Adars, the first one always has 30 days and the second one always has 29 days. Since Sh'vat has 30 days, the Rosh Chodesh of both Adars is two days. With the molad this
month being 5:19pm on Thursday, March 10th, the first op for Kiddush
L'vana is Sunday night, March 13. With the 3 days (72 hours) reached
less than an hour before it will be dark enough to say K.L., we will
be dealing with a "young" moon - just about as small as it can be
and be able to say K.L. In addition to P'kudei
being Rosh Chodesh & Sh'kalim , there are two other year-types when
Sh'kalim is Rosh Chodesh Adar, when Parshat HaShavua will be
Mishpatim (3 yrs. ago) or T'rumah (11 yrs. ago). Observation: Back in Parshat T'ruma, the people of Israel were solicited, so to speak, to contribute generously to the building of the Mishkan. The materials needed were gold, silver, and copper, dyed wool, linen, skins of certain animals, wood, olive oil, spices, precious and semi-precious stones. The rest of T'ruma and T'tzaveh showed us what the materials were to be used for. Ki Tisa began with a command to contribute exactly one-half silver shekel - not more and not less. Then we see more of what the "contributions" were used for. In the beginning of Vayak-hel, we find a review of the materials and a restatement that the people were asked to give whatever their hearts moved them to give. The Torah tells us that the giving was so generous that the craftsman reported to Moshe that they had enough material, and Moshe told the people to stop giving. And then the Torah proceeds to describe the use of the collected materials in the construction of the Mishkan and its furnishings. In P'kudei, before the Torah continues with the description of the garments of the Kohein Gadol, it gives an accounting of the gold, silver, and copper collected. And here is the point of this observation. The gold and the copper (as well as all the other materials) came from voluntary donations- no set amounts; but the silver, the 100 Kikar 1775 shekel, which is 301,775 shekels (based on 3000 shekels to a Kikar) of silver, came from the half-shekel mandatory, fixed-amount collection. The amount equals a half shekel from 603,550 males, 20 years old and up. And what was the silver
used for? 99.4% of it was used for the ADANIM. The foundation
sockets of the Mishkan. Foundation. Get it? Foundation. That came
from everyone, equally. Build upon that, furnish the Mishkan, with
the free contributions. But the foundation is shared equally by all.
Hi O Silver! SDT We are taught from the fact that Moshe Rabeinu gave a voluntary accounting of the materials, that a person in the position of collecting monies for the community must conduct himself in such a way that he will always be above suspicion. Even if the individual is completely trustworthy, he should take measures to avoid the possibility of appearing improper. We learn similarly from the episode of the two and a half tribes that one must behave in such a way that he will be "clean before G-d AND Israel". The Talmud tells us that the family of Kohanim that was in charge of compounding the Ketoret (incense) did not allow its women to use perfume, lest they be suspected of taking from the sacred ingredients of the Ketoret. Similarly, bakers of the Lechem HaPanim did not eat fine bread, so that no one should even get an idea that they were taking the special flour of the Mikdash for their own use. SDT In the opening pasuk of the sedra, we find the word Mishkan twice in a row - ...HaMishkan, Mishkan HaEidut. Rashi says that this is an allusion to the two Batei HaMikdash. Chatam Sofer adds that the HEI of the first Mishkan is "missing" from the second. This alludes to the 5 special items missing in the second Beit HaMikdash - the ARON, the Holy Fire, the Divine Presence, the Holy Spirit, and the Urim V'Tumim. SDT Rashi teaches us that the description of the Mishkan as EIDUT, a Testimony, attests to the fact that G-d had forgiven us for the Sin of the Golden Calf. This is so because the SH'CHINA rested among us, in the Mishkan. The work of assembling and dismantling the Mishkan throughout the years of wandering in the Wilderness was the domain of the tribe of Levi, under the supervision and leadership of Itamar b. Aharon HaKohen. The chief artisans of the Mishkan, the Torah reminds us, were Bezalel from Yehuda and Aholiav from Dan. [S> 38:24 (9)] The Torah next details the amounts of gold, silver, and copper which were collected for the Mishkan and its vessels. The Torah also lists the uses of the different metals. Then the Torah mentions the different dyed wools (sky-blue, purple, red - the shades of color are debated - e.g. sky-blue - at what time of day?) that were used in the making of the sacred garments of the Kohen Gadol, and for the cloths that covered (and protected) the sacred items of the Mishkan during the traveling from place to place in the Midbar. SDT The Baal HaTurim
notes that the Mishkan was supported on a foundation of 100 silver
ADANIM. So too are our daily lives as Jews supported by 100 silver
foundation sockets - the 100 Brachot which we strive to recite every
day. [S> 39:6 (2)] Two onyx stones (Avnei Shoham) were attached to the shoulder straps of the Eifod. The names of the 12 tribes (actually, it was the 12 sons of Yaakov) were engraved on the stones, six on each stone. How the names were divided is the subject of dispute among our various sources. Another opinion is that the emblems of the tribes were engraved on the stones along side the names. Rambam says that Yosef was written as Y'HOSEF (a spelling that appears in T'hilim), resulting in a symmetrical 25 letters on each stone. [P> 39:8 (14)] On the
Choshen, the 50 letters of the names were supplemented by 22 letters
of the names of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov, and the words SHIVTEI
Y'SHURUN on the Choshen. This brought the total number of letters to
72, corresponding to the SHEIM HA'M'FORASH. The arrangement of names
and letters resulted in 6 per stone. In addition to the fabric of
these two garments, there were gold settings for the stones, gold
rings and chains for attaching Choshen & Eifod. Observation: This is the second time that the Torah emphasizes the prohibition of tearing the ME'IL (or allowing it to be torn). None of the garments may be torn; precautions were taken to avoid tearing. Yet the Torah presents the rule specifically with the ME'IL. The hem of the ME'IL was fringed with alternating bells of gold and pompoms of colored wools. According to Rambam, there were 72 bells in all, 36 in the front and 36 in the back. Ramban says that the bells were embedding within the RIMONIM. Most other commentaries say that the bells alternated with RIMONIM. The author of HaK’tav V’HaKabala offers a beautiful explanation of the bells of the ME’IL: “The precept to place bells... is similar to mitzva of tzitzit on our garments. In the latter case, seeing the fringes... reminds us of all the precepts of the Torah, as per Bamidbar 15:39. In the former case, hearing the bells reminded the Kohein Gadol of all the precepts. Because of his elevated status, and the many obligations which he was required to fulfill, he was granted an additional reminder - via his sense of hearing. In this way, the sound of the bells at the edge of his robe would arouse his mind and heart to awareness of before Whom he wore the priestly garments, and Who commanded him to wear them. Thus, his mind and thoughts would be fully occupied in the service of the Supreme King.” [S> 39:27 (3)] The KUTONET, a long-sleeved, floor- length garment was woven of white linen. Some say that the sleeves were woven together with the body of the garment, rather than made separately and then sewn on. All Kohanim wore a KUTONET. Each had it custom-fitted, since it is forbidden to do AVODA in the Mikdash if the garment was either two long or too short, or frayed or soiled. A turban of linen was worn by the Kohen Gadol in one style, to accommodate the TZITZ. Regular Kohanim wore their turban in a different style. The belt or sash, AVNEIT, was woven from the three colors of wool and from linen. It was unusually long (32 AMOT, approx. 15 meters, about 50 feet) and therefore needed to be wound around the kohein's waist many times. (Some say that the AVNEIT was worn above the waist.) The winding produced a prominent bulge around his waist which he felt whenever his hands were at his sides. This served as a constant reminder to the Kohein of the seriousness of the service in the Beit HaMikdash. The AVNEIT was Shaatnez, as was the Choshen and Eifod. There are different
opinions as to whether the regular kohen wore an AVNEIT of pure
linen or of the same mixed weave of the Kohein Gadol's AVNEIT. [S> 39:32 (1)] Thus, all the work of the parts of the Mishkan and the garments of the Kohanim came to an end. (All that remained was to put everything together and in its right place.) SDT Talmud Yerushalmi
notes that the phrase, "as G-d had commanded Moshe" appears 18 times
in P'kudei. Correspondingly, we have 18 brachot in our weekday Amida
(the connection between Service in the Mikdash and Davening is
obvious, or should be). Thus says Sh'muel b. Nachmani in the name of
Rabbi Yochanan. This does not include the first time the phrase is
used: And Bezalel... did all the G-d had commanded Moshe. There are
differences between the context of the phrase with Bezalel and
contexts of all the other uses of the phrase that justify its not
being counted together with the rest. On the other hand, our Amida
does have a 19th bracha, so the "extra" phrase is covered. Moshe blessed the people: "May it be G-d's will that He will cause His Presence to settle upon your handiwork." (Rashi) The Torah once again enumerates all of the components of the Mishkan. And repeats over and over again that the People did everything that G-d had commanded Moshe. Here's a thought... The
emphasis upon the people doing as commanded stands in harsh contrast
to the Golden Calf, which was not at all what G-d had commanded. We
can see a rebuke every time the point is made that, "this time we
listened, but what happened a couple of months ago..." (To be sure,
it is complimentary, that we did as commanded, but we can also see
an implied rebuke.) Then the Shulchan and Menora were put in their places, followed by the Golden Mizbei'ach. The MASACH was then hung from the posts at the entrance to the Mishkan. The Copper Mizbeiach was then place in front of the Mishkan, opposite its entrance. The KIYOR and its base were then placed between the Mishkan and the Mizbei'ach, slightly to the side. The courtyard curtains were then hung from their posts. Following all this, Moshe was to anoint all the components of the Mishkan and sanctify them. Then the Mizbei'ach and its vessels were anointed, and the Laver as well. Then the Kohanim were brought forward. After proper ablutions, they were clothed in their sacred garments and anointed. Note that Aharon's sons
were also anointed. Regular kohanim are not; they were exceptions.
It gave them a status of Kohen Gadol. That's why Elazar and Itamar
were not able to tend to the bodies of their brothers Nadav and
Avihu, and cousins were called in to take care of things. Aharon's
sons needed to be anointed, because they weren't kohanim by birth,
as opposed to all other kohanim throughout all generations. (Pinchas
is the one exception, and he was given the status of kohein by G-d. [S> 40:17 (3)] And it came to pass that on the first day of Nissan, in the second year out of Egypt (almost), the Mishkan was completed. In this portion, the Torah spells out the step-by-step procedures of finally carrying out the commands of Parshiyot T'ruma, T'tzaveh, beginning of Ki Tisa, all of Vayakhel. Observation: There are many comments made about the fact that the order of parts and furnishings of the Mishkan are different between the commands of Parshat T’rumah and the construction in Vayakhel. Look at the order in the end of P’kudei, which describes the actual assembly of the Mishkan. It differs from either previous order. And it is a reasonable order that does not require miracles. (This does not mean that there were none.) ADANIM (foundations), wall boards, braces for the walls, pillars for the curtains. Coverings. [S> 40:20 (2)] Then the LUCHOT go into the ARON, the carrying poles are inserted into their rings, the lid (KAPORET) is placed on the ARON and the complete ARON is placed into the Mishkan. When in position, the PAROCHET is hung between what now becomes the Holy of Holies (with the ARON) and the rest of the Mishkan. [S> 40:22 (2)] Then the SHULCHAN is set in place and the LECHEM HAPANIM is placed on the shelves of the SHULCHAN. [S> 40:24 (2)] The MENORA goes in place next, opposite the SHULCHAN. Then the oil cups are placed on the tops of the seven branches of the Menora. [S> 40:26 (2)] The Golden Mizbei’ach is then set in the middle of the KODESH and KETORET is offered on it. [S> 40:28 (2)] With that, the MASACH was hung across the entrance of the MISKAN. Then the external (copper, earth, sacrificial) Mizbei’ach was put in place, opposite the entrance to the Mishkan, and an OLAH was offered on it. [S> 40:30 (3)] The LAVER (KIYOR) was set between the Mishkan and Mizbeiach, and it was filled with water. [S> 40:33 (1)] Finally came the poles and curtains of the courtyard and the curtain at its entrance. [P> 40:34 (5)] In the final 5 p'sukim of Sh'mot, the Torah tells us that Moshe was not able to approach the Mishkan because it was "covered by a Cloud". Only when the cloud lifted was Moshe able to approach. The Cloud was also that which signaled the people to travel or to remain encamped. The Cloud was there by day and the Pillar of Fire by night. Thus ends the Book of Sh'mot, with the stage set, so to speak, for the Book of Vayikra, Torat Kohanim. In the course of the Book of Sh'mot, we started out as a family that was in Egypt, enslaved and oppressed there. We grew into a nation, were redeemed from Egypt, accompanied by great wonders and miracles. We received the Torah, and set up the two main aspects of our nationhood - the day-to-day rules of a Torah way of life and the building of the Mishkan to be the focus of our spiritual energies. G-d's plan for us is
well underway. Everything is there except for THE venue for Jewish
Life at its richest - Eretz Yisrael. But three books of the Chumash
are still to come. Although the ½-Shekel
collection was used for the census, its main purpose was to provide
funds (to which all Jews contributed equally) for communal offerings
throughout the year. It is useful to see this annual tax as a
membership fee in Klal Yisrael, so to speak. All Jews - rich or poor
- have the same share in the communal fund. Rabbi Julian Jacobs in
his "A Haftara Companion", suggests the following: “A message of
both the sedra and the haftara is that Jews in each generation have
duties towards the upkeep of the Synagogue and other communal
causes. Apart from the practical financial benefits this brings, the
acceptance of this responsibility has contributed to the inner
strength of the Jewish people down the ages.” After the work was commenced, there may be some reason why the employer requires other type of work to be done, or perhaps the work for which the employee was hired was completed and there was still time during the day for which the employee was hired. Since most of the work done by day workers was of a physical nature, there is a difference between the demand of the job, whether it is classified as easy or hard physical labor. Every community has its own standards as to what is easy or hard. An Employee Is Hired
Without Specifying the Scope of His Work The Scope of the Work
Is Specified If the teacher was hired to teach a class of a specified number of students and one of them got sick, the community can substitute another student even if it is harder to teach the substitute student than the student who got sick. Employee may consume
produce of field We will first discuss the circumstances under which a worker may eat of the produce on which he is working, whether attached or detached from the soil, and when he may not do so. The time when the employee is going to eat of the produce is crucial as to whether or not he may do so. There is a limited time when it is permitted to eat produce still attached to the soil when the employee takes hold of the produce to eat it; there is a limited time when it is permitted to eat produce detached from the soil when the employee takes hold of the produce to eat it. These lessons also discuss certain obligations of the employee regarding the eating in the field of the employer. Rabbi Yosef Karo in Shulchan Aruch also discusses a few other obligations of the employee to the employer, although not dealing with the eating of the produce of the employer. I have also included some of these laws. It should be remembered that for many agricultural workers, the right to eat of the food they are handling is an economic benefit to them but it is also of benefit to the employer in that it obviates the necessity for the worker to take excessive time off from the job for meals. I have added to the end of the next lesson a section called "Current Practice." The laws of these lessons are generally superseded by agreements or local practice; but where they are not so covered, or the parties want to be bound by the halacha, I have stated my own conclusions. The Torah Command The subject matter of
this lesson is more fully discussed in volume IX chapters 335 and
337 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 According to this symbolism, our job on earth is to align our actions as much as possible towards G^d's light as revealed in the Torah. This will ultimately result in restoring the "deficiency" of the moon and bringing about a state where this material, sublunary world perfectly expresses God's will. Rav Natan adds two insights to this widespread understanding. First of all, he explains that the "real" truth according to our circumstances is not the supernal truth represented by the sun, nor the circumscribed this-worldly truth represented by the moon, but precisely the unity or reconciliation of the two. (This is significantly different from a Platonic perspective where the worldly expression of truth is considered a mere illusion or distortion.) The other insight is that the lack of harmony between sun and moon is represented not only by the amount of light but also by the lack of synchronization. The moon is not only an imperfect mirror, it is also an imperfect timekeeper. Thus intercalation is also a way of bringing together the sun and the moon and making this world a more perfect expression of holiness. This is done by a Beit Din, who represent the ability to exercise judgment in accordance with Torah. Based on this, Rav Natan explains why the leap month is specifically Adar. Adar is the month that especially exemplifies this aspect of truth. The nature of Amalek is that they completely deny Godliness in the world, and believe that all is according to chance or nature. (While Rav Natan does not say so, we can point out that Haman chose the time to carry out his plan by chance, the PUR or die, and that the holiday is named Purim precisely for this scheme. Note also that the die were cast for which month, hinting perhaps at the identification of Amalek solely with the barren "lunar" aspect of reality. See Esther 3:7.) That is why Hashem states that His name will not be complete until Amalek is wiped out (Shemot 17:16 and Rashi's commentary). The two aspects or parts of the four-letter name correspond in our mystical symbolism precisely to the sun and moon aspects of holiness. Since Amalek stubbornly deny any connection between the two, they constitute an obstacle to their complete unity and synchronization. Only when the darkness of denial is completely overcome can Hashem's radiance be completely realized in this world. Another halakha related to Adar is that this is an auspicious month for judgments with non-Jews (Mishna B'rura 686:8). We can relate this also to the insight of Rav Natan. Some of the nations which are our sometime rivals have a calendar based solely on the lunar month; the calendar years are not at all related to the cycle of the seasons. This reminds us of an excessive tendency to realism, to conducting our affairs according the circumscribed reality of the "real world" without being enlightened and inspired by higher ideals. Other nations have a calendar based solely on the solar year; the months are not at all related to the cycle of the moon. This reminds us of an excessive tendency to idealism, to act according to higher ideals even when these are completely inappropriate to the actual circumstances we face. The Jewish calendar, adding an extra lunar month to remain synchronized with the solar year, overcomes both of these tendencies. Thus it gives us a "victory" in attaining true and balanced judgment in the "court" of our relations with other nations. Based on Likutei Halakhot Dayanim III:11,12,19 Publication Update:
Rabbi Meir's book on Jewish business ethics, The Jewish Ethicist, is
now in print! It has also just been named "Book of the Month" on the
shamash.org website. It is available through Ktav publishing house,
or ask your local bookseller. Even without treating
the story from a literary perspective, one cannot ignore that
Megillat Rut has been seen as the perfect short story. The
characters play real and fascinating roles, the events follow on
each other rapidly and the language whilst sparse and terse, clearly
bears witness to the ideas and issues of the story. One example of
how the brief language reveals human and spiritual tensions is the
difference between Naomi's reactions to approaching Bet Lechem and
those of Ruth's. Our text tells us, "So the two of them went" (Ruth
1:19); in contrast we read about Avraham and Yitzchak going to the
Akeida, "So they both went together" (B'reishit 22:8). There father
and son went together on the same road, spiritually and emotionally,
even though it was clear that the father was going in order to
sacrifice his son. Here, while the two women were going to the same
place, this was only a physical fact without any unity either of
purpose or feeling. Naomi was returning to her home town a widow,
bereft of her sons and in poverty, while Ruth was a woman coming to
a strange land, a convert and of a people of whom the Torah had said
"the 10th generation shall not enter the congregation of Hashem for
ever" (D'varim 22:4). How could their emotions, hopes and fears be
the same? Naomi had tried to persuade Ruth to follow Orpah back to Moav, with logical and rational arguments. Ruth's answer of two verses (16-17), remains to this day the classic answer of converts, thus making her the prototype of them all. "Entreat me not to leave you": There is mesirat nefesh, unswerving devotion to the path she chooses irrespective of the hardships and difficulties raised by the arguments against her conversion. This test is made of all converts. "Wherever you go I will go": The recognition that Judaism is a way of walking, halakha, obligatory ways of behavior that covers the whole of life's activities in order to realize G-d's commandment to Abraham: "Walk before Me and be perfect, complete, tamim" (B'reishit 17:1). "Where you lodge I will lodge": There is the Jewish home that is devoted to becoming a house for G-d as Ya'akov saw in his revelation of the ladder reaching to Heaven - "Surely there is G-d in this place, this is no other than the house of G-d". This is the home where the normal vessels and furniture of every day human living are sanctified through kashrut, through pure speech, through Torah study, through taharat hamishpacha and through modest standards of living. Here the very doorposts carry the scroll of G-d's commandments telling those who enter to observe them and those who exit to remember to observe them in the street, the market-place and in leisure. "Your people shall be my people": This precedes Ruth's statement about G-d. Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda Kook taught me that from this we can learn that there can be attachment to the Jewish People even before the attachment to G-d. Indeed, we see that it was only after the revelations about the Chosen Abrahamic Nation and its first exile, and their Promised Land with its boundaries clearly spelt out in Parshat Lekh Lekha, that the first mention of a G-d relationship was made (Gen 17:7). Some commentators have deduced that Yitro never became a true convert because while he accepted Hashem, he returned to his own nation of Midyan. However, Ruth's conversion was complete since she showed that she understood and accepted the integration of Nation and Religion that is so intrinsic and special only to Judaism. "Your G-d is my G-d": Some would like to argue perhaps that Judaism's ethical and moral teachings are so noble and so important that they may be taught and practiced without any belief in G-d. However, it is their Divine origin that makes those values different from any that the human mind and intelligence is capable of creating. Furthermore, it is only the acceptance of a G-d implemented reward and punishment that can guarantee human adherence to these ethics and morals. There is also a concept that Judaism is merely a legal system without love, spirituality or religiosity; yet in truth the G-d that Ruth was following is both Our King and Our Father. "Where you die I will die and there I will be buried": Although Judaism is concerned with living there is also a Jewish way of dying and of burial. The dead require us to mourn for them yet such mourning is temporary and limited; "And Avraham came to mourn for Sarah and to weep for her" (B'reishit 23:2); LIVKOTA written with a small kaf, denotes that one should nor weep for the dead excessively (Rashi). There is shiva and kaddish to forestall the rebellion of the mourners against Hashem's decrees, burial rather than cremation to allow the body to return to the earth from which it was created, and the simplicity of the coffins and memorials to underscore the equalization that is death. Above all, there is the concept of pikuach nefesh but also of martyrdom of Kiddush Hashem to demonstrate that sometimes there are values that are more important even than life. One of the reasons we read Ruth on Shavuot is because her revelation parallels our Revelation at Sinai. Through the merits of
her Chesed and her wise, clear and powerful acceptance of Judaism,
Ruth truly merited the words of the women of Bet Lechem: "To be like
Rachel and Leah which two did build the House of Israel". But there
was even more to Ruth. She was also the Mother of the House of
Kingship: "These are the generations of Judah / Peretz / Nachshon /
Boaz / Yishai / David". "Why did David require an ancestress from
Moav? Jews are not able to rule over other Jews, since they lack the
pride required to enforce kingship; Shaul's rule could not continue
because of his great modesty. Ruth, however, gave to David the pride
inherited from Moav, that enabled him to rule with Chesed and
Justice but also with Kingship" (Shem Mi Shmuel). A: Shemot 21:15 lists striking one's parent as a capital offense, and the gemara (Sanhedrin 84b) says that that is when he causes a CHABURA (wound). The gemara then asks whether one is permitted to let blood (a medical practice at that time) for his parent. Two derivations from the Torah are brought to show that when the action is done in a positive context, it is permitted. Yet the gemara relates that Amora'im would not allow their sons to perform certain procedures, fearing that they might accidentally make a wound, which is a serious transgression. Regarding some- one other than a parent, where the sin of injuring is less severe, it is permitted to draw blood despite the fear of injury. The gemara's conclusion seems to be that it should have been permitted for a child to perform medical procedures that include puncturing his parent's body, but that we instruct him to refrain. Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 241:3) rules unequivocally that a child should not let his parent's blood or remove a splinter. However, the Rama (ad loc.), based on the Rambam, adds that if the child is the only one available to do the procedure, he should do so. Let us apply this general, halachic back- ground to our specific case. Several poskim discuss injections for parents, including four responsa that open Gesher HaChayim, vol. II. We will summarize the main indicators for leniency and try to come to some conclusion. Gesher HaChayim (ibid.) raises the point that, halachically, a CHABURA must include some spilled blood or blood that accumulates under the skin. The gemara's conclusion, which was meant to be only a stringency (Bach on Yoreh De'ah 241) was concerned about a mistake, but perhaps it was designed for a case of a definite wound, with the mistake being that it went beyond the therapeutic need. If there is only a small chance of a wound at all it is possible that the stringency does not apply (The probability of blood depends on where the injection is done and other factors). Minchat Chinuch (#48) claims that if a father asks his son to wound him, the son is not bound by the prohibition of striking a parent. Some (including R. Sh. Z. Ohrbach, cited in Gesher HaChayim, ibid.) raise a possibility that this enables a father to say he agrees that his son treat him, even if it includes unnecessary damage. This suggestion is problematic on a few grounds. The Rivash (#484) says that permission only exempts some- one from damage payments but cannot permit causing bodily damage. Igrot Moshe (CM II, 64) says that one can ask someone to cause a non-medical but helpful wound, but he cannot ask his child to do so. Furthermore ,it is unlikely that the parent does not mind if the child injures him unnecessarily. His main intention is, even if he says otherwise, to permit a proper job, and halacha is concerned that he may not. It is also quite clear that the early authorities did not accept the Minchat Chinuch's approach. Ashkenazim can rely on the Rama's ruling that if no one else can do the treatment, then the child may. It is unlikely that no one else can do injections. However, poskim discuss the parameters of availability in this context. Some suggest that the prospect that the child can do it for free, whereas others will charge, maybe sufficient (see Gesher Hachayim ibid. and Chelkat Yaakov, YD 131). (This point is too complex to do justice in this forum.) Sometimes the chance of reliable treatment is improved by the child's ability to provide the service himself (see Minchat Yitzchak I, 27). In summation, Sefardim
should make every effort to find an alternative to a child injecting
his parent. For Ashkenazim, one should do whatever system is best
for the patient's welfare, but the child should avoid doing
injections when comparable alternatives exist. One should consult a
local rabbi in borderline cases. Rashi explains the repetition of the word Mishkan with a play on words - "Mishkan," meaning Tabernacle, and "Mashkon," denoting a pledge given as security for a debt. He writes that the repetition alludes to the two Temples which were pledged by their destruction due to the sins of Israel. Rabbi Zalman Sorotzkin, in his commentary to the Torah "Oznayim LaTorah," explains the use of the word pledge in reference to the destruction of the two Temples by way of an analogy to the everyday world of commerce. When a person suffers a financial setback and finds himself unable to provide for his daily needs, he may react in various different ways. A person who has no hope for improvement will sell his possessions. However, one who is hopeful about the future will pledge his possessions and take loans, because he is confident that better times lay ahead of him and that he will be able to redeem his pledges. The history of the Jewish people includes periods of spiritual wealth as well as periods of spiritual poverty. The latter led to Divine punishment, the loss of the Temple and exile from the land of Israel. But these losses are temporary. As stated by Rashi in Pekudei, they are pledges to be redeemed - speedily in our days - Amen. Isaac Tarshansky, Har
Homa, Jerusalem Simchat Torah is always a 3-Torah day, but it isn't always on Shabbat, In Chutz LaAretz, it NEVER is. In Eretz Yisrael, Simchat Torah falls on Shabbat 28½% of the time (when- ever Rosh HaShana is Shabbat). The next possible 3TSh is Shabbat Chanuka, when Rosh Chodesh Tevet is Shabbat. (Specifically, it is 30 Kislev - first day of Rosh Chodesh Tevet - that can be Shabbat; the first of Tevet does not fall on Shabbat.) This happens 28% of the time - never in the same year as Simchat Torah on Shabbat. The final two candidates for 3TSh are Sh'kalim and HaChodesh when their Rosh Chodesh (Adar or Adar Sheni for Sh'kalim and Nissan for HaChodesh) falls on Shabbat. HaChodesh is a 3TSh 28% of the years, and Sh'kalim, only 11½% of the time (including this year). 3TSh for Sh'kalim happens in the same year-types as Triple Purim and Erev Pesach on Shabbat. In Chutz LaAretz, 42½%
of years have no 3TSh, and 10% have two (Chanuka and HaChodesh).
Years with 3TSh are slightly more common than ones without. On the lighter side... On the lighter side of the lighter side... (Pre-Purim Torah) There is a difference of opinion as to whether different kugels that are made from the same major ingredient are counted separately in the kugel-count. Even those who hold that two different potato kugels, for example, cannot be counted separately, all would agree that Yerushalmi kugel and a noodle kugel can be counted separately, provided that the noodle kugel uses wider noodles than those in the Yerushalmi kugel. If there are raisins or chunks of pineapple in the sweet noodle kugel, then it can be counted on its own, even if the noodles are the same width as those in the Yerushalmi kugel. There is a question as to whether a PASHTIDA (broccoli, spinach, sweet potato, etc.) can count for this minhag, if the PASHTIDA in question is not usually referred to as KUGEL. In cases of doubt, do
not ask a Rav - he'll probably think you started your Purim drinking
a little too early this year. 2) Chazal teach that every day of the consecration of the Mishkan Moshe dismantled it and rebuilt it. Why did he do this? 3) How do we understand
the Midrash that states that the Mishkan assembled itself
miraculously in light of the Torah's statement that Moshe built the
Mishkan (40:18)? (2) Why does the Torah
emphasize that the 7th day "will be holy FOR YOU" (35:2)? (3) Why is Betzalel's
name associated with the ARON, and only with the Aron? Parsha Points to Ponder
is prepared by Rabbi Dov Lipman of Beit Shemesh. Answers may be
submitted to him at:ppp@israelcenter.co.il Answers will appear next
week. The weavers finished their craft and then: "All the work… was completed… and Bnei Yisrael did everything that Hashem commanded Moshe - so they did. (Shmot 39:32). And again in verse 43:
"Kein Asu" - and so they did. In fact three times the Torah repeats
that Bnei Yisrael did exactly as commanded in building the Mishkan. No wonder that
immediately afterwards the people deserved Moshe's blessing as
represented in the psalm that he composed: "May the pleasantness of
my Lord be upon us… [and] may He establish our handiwork for us
(Psalm 90:17). These required Chata'ot were fixed (Chatat Kavu'a), no adjustments were permitted because of the economic condition of the offender. If the offender could not bring a she-goat or a ewe, the Halachic obligation remained until his economic circumstances improved. But there were three transgressions which part of the atonement process consisted of bringing a Korban Oleh V'Yoreid, "a rising and falling offering", i.e., a Korban which varied according to the financial means of the offender. (1) "If a person will sin: If he accepted a demand for an oath (in court), and he is a witness - either he saw or he knew - if he does not testify, he shall bear his iniquity…" (Vayikra 5:1). Upon admitting that he swore falsely, the offender obligates himself to bring a Korban Oleh V'Yoreid (Shevu'ot 33b). (2) "Or if a person will have touched any impure object, whether it be the carcass of an impure animal (Chaya) or the carcass of impure cattle (B'heima) or the carcass of impure creeping things, and it was concealed from him and he becomes impure and makes himself guilty. Or if he touches the impurity of man, whatsoever impurity it be by which he became impure, and it was concealed from him, but he became aware of it and became guilty (Vayikra 5:2,3). Since it is not mentioned specifically, the Gemara asks, "How do we know that the Torah (in ordaining an Oleh V'Yoreid for impurity) refers only to cases where the Mikdash is entered or Kodashim (i.e., sacrificial meat) is eaten when ritually impure?" The Gemara answers, "The Torah warns against impurity (in the wilderness camp, Bamidbar 5:2,3 and the Gemara interprets this as an admonition against entering the Mikdash while impure (Pesachim 67a). The warning, "He shall not eat of Kodashim until he be pure" (Vayikra 22:4) was interpreted literally.) Vayikra 4:6 requires that a Korban be brought for impurity (for unintentional transgression. Therefore, since normally being impure was not sinful), a Korban was only required when the Mikdash was entered or Kodashim eaten in a state of impurity" (Shevu'ot 6b). (3) "Or if a person will swear, expressing with his lips to do harm or to do good, anything that a person will express in an oath, but it was concealed from him (i.e., he forgot that he had made the vow and as a result, he broke it), and then he knew and he became guilty…" (Vayikra 5:4). The Torah continues, "…he shall confess what he had sinned. And bring to G-d as an expression of his guilt… a ewe or a she-goat as a Chatat." After considering these three sins, the Torah continues, "if his means are insufficient for a sheep or a goat, he shall bring as 'an expression of the guilt of the sin that he has committed' two turtle doves or young pigeons to G-d, one for a Chatat and one for an Olah (Vayikra 5:6,11). Both the bird-Chatat and Olah were slaughtered and readied for sacrifice by the unique method of Melika (described in last weeks TT, March 4-5, #658) though there was one significant difference between them. "…he will offer first the Chatat; he shall nip (cut) its head at the nape but not separate (the head from the body of the bird.)" In his Sefer HaMitzvot, Rambam lists this prohibition (Lo Ta'aseh #112) in accordance with this Pasuk. However, when the Kohein performed Melika to a bird- Olah, he did sever the head from the body (Zevachim 6:5). Another difference was that the Kohein performed Melika to the bird-Olah while standing on the Soveiv (the Mizbei'ach circuit ledge) at the southeast corner of the Mizbei'ach; however the Kohein performed Melika to the bird-Chatat while standing on the floor facing the southwest corner. When offering the bird-Chatat, he "sprinkled some of the blood (by grasping the bird in his hand and shaking it towards the Mizbei'ach) upon the side of the altar, the remainder of the (bird's) blood would be squeezed on the base (of the altar by pressing the body against the Mizbei'ach wall so the blood flowed down to the base.) And the altar received only the (bird's) blood (Unlike other Korbanot, no part of the bird-Chatat was burnt on the altar.). All of (the meat) went to the Kohanim" who ate it in the Azara the day of sacrifice and the following night until midnight (Zevachim 6:4). If the offender could not afford two turtle doves or young pigeons, he could bring "a tenth-Eifa of fine flour for a sin offering (Vayikra 5:11). <END> In TT #654, I described archeological excavations carried out in the Herodian Street immediately to the west of the Kotel, Robinson's Arch, Mikdash-era Mikva'ot, and the "Western Wall tunnels". I wrote how while I was visiting the "Western Wall tunnels" I met an "articulate, intellectual, urbane" Jewish woman who told me that all the Hasmonean and Herodian structures that I had written about were "actually built by the Umayyads, the early Muslim conquerors of Palestine in the beginning of the 7th century." She explained to me that various academics, many of them Israeli, had "proved" that there never were Jewish temples on Har HaBayit and that there never was a noticeable Jewish presence in Palestine." Duly indoctrinated, she came here to "atone for the sins of the Jewish people" by picking olives in Ramallah. Living in Yerushalyim Ir HaKodesh and anticipating and yearning for Bayit Shlishi as we do, many of us are incredulous that such types actually exist. This communication from Dr. Nahum Duker of Melrose Park, Pa. should cause all of us to sit up and take notice. There are many people "out there" for whom stealing Eretz Yisrael from Am Yisrael is not enough; even more perniciously, they want to steal our history as well! "I have encountered
many academics holding opinions similar to that of your Ramallah
olive-picker. One of the most frequently assigned texts in college
archeology courses is Keith Whitelam's "The Invention of Ancient
Israel; the Silencing of Palestinian History". Don't bother reading
the book; the title says it all. Should anyone criticize it, he is
instantly denounced as a "fundamentalist", an insult comparable with
racist, sexist or orientalist. I find it interesting that the
reaction of the mainstream Jewish organizations to holocaust denial
is emotional and vehement, while there is no reaction whatever to
Bible denial…" Dr. Duker further writes, "Apropos of my last letter,
I understated the impact of the "new archeologists", and their
alliances with the forces of political correctness. They will write
the next generation's textbooks and public school curricula, and it
is most likely that in 10 years the only places where the existence
of the first and second Temples will be mentioned will be in the
religious private schools. Those who continue to affirm the
existence of the Temples will be denounced as "fundamentalists" and
denigrated as bigoted morons. …It is likely that "Temple denial"
will become the standard consensus among the semi-educated elites,
both here and in Israel." In the opening portion of ATA YATZARTA, we find the following: And because we have sinned (we and our ancestors), our City was destroyed... cha-R'VA u-REI-nu. cha-R'VA. Under the CHET is a KAMATZ GADOL and under the REISH is a SH'VA NA. This word, correctly pronounced - cha-R'VA (or in Ashkenazis, chaw-R'VAW) is past tense, destroyed. A common way to read this word incorrectly is: chawr-VA (or chawr-VAW), with a KAMAT KATAN under the CHET and a SH'VA NACH under the REISH. That word is a pleading-request-command format, which is definitely NOT what we want to say, that our City should be (G-d forbid) destroyed. Of course, the mispronunciation of cha-R'VA i-REI-nu comes from carelessness or being uninformed about the fine-tuning of correct pronunciation, but that is why this column exists. And, as I've said many times, it is not only to harp on the picky little points that we bring up these various issues. Paying attention to how we pronounce words goes hand in hand with understanding what they mean. Understanding what we say in davening and what we read in the Torah and NACH, is essential to proper KAVANA, intention, and feeling. And that is the goal of Towards Better Davening and Torah Reading. We find the "elongated Tzivui" form of verbs in many places in Tanach and davening. Be careful not to say that KA-R'VA SH'NAT HASH'MITA... that the Shmita year is approaching (and therefore you won't want to lend money to a poor person), contrasted with KAwRVA EL NAFSHI G'ALA, (please) draw near my soul and redeem it. With the KAMATZ KATAN and SH'VA NACH, it is a plea. With KAMATZ GADOL and SH'VA NA is is past tense (or present progressive). Bottom line, in Musaf this Shabbat, say cha-R'VA, and may HaShem answer our petition in the affirmative, when we say a few sentences later: Y'HI RATZON MILFANECHA... that You will bring us up in gladness to our Land and plant us within our boundaries (some of us are here already, B"H). There (here) we will perform before You the rite of our required offerings... (in the Beit HaMikdash, may it be built speedily in our time). And speaking of Musaf for Shabbat - Rosh Chodesh, we include below, the text of the concluding paragraph of the middle bracha of the Musaf Amida - with the KAD'SHEINU piece that seems to have gotten lost some when (of course we could say sometime, but then you wouldn't necessarily know that some when is a real word, which it is) in the last number of centuries. Rinat Yisrael siddur,
in its later editions, has this text, as do some other siddurim of
recent vintage. We recommend that you consult your Rav before
switching to this text from the more commonly found version. The
Aruch HaShulchan, for one, insists that this is the correct version
to say. 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 [The
Parshat P'kudei Homepage]
|
