Shabbat Parshat
Vayeira Z'MANIM - HALACHIC TIMES - Correct for
TT #640 All other places at some height above sea level have similar problems. Tzfat lights candles 30 minutes before sunset. Official candle lighting for Petach Tikva is 40 minutes before sunset, just like Jerusalem. Not everybody holds by that timing. Some communities calculate Shabbat out at
33 minutes after sunset. Some use the angle of the sun below the horizon to
“end Shabbat” (8.5 deg). Also realize that Sfardim and Ashkenazim
often has differences in minhag. Sunset, on the other hand, is given for an elevation of 825m and, in parentheses, as if at sea level. There are different opinions as to which sunset time should be used for halachic purposes. We present both times. The deadlines for the SH'MA and the Shacharit Amida can be calculated in two ways. Either considering the day to be from sunrise to sunset or from dawn to stars out. The first way of reckoning is known as the opinion of the GR"A, and is the first time given in each case. The second method is known as the Magen Avraham, and is presented in parentheses. Aside from candle lighting and havdala, the times are presented as a range, from the current Thursday of the issue of Torah Tidbits until the coming Thursday, a span of 8 days. Days between the two Thursdays can be determined by interpolation (which means: a method by which to estimate a value of between two known values-this is something that people above a certain age might remember from high school trigonometry and logarithms, but younger people who went to school during the calculator era might not be familiar with). It is usually wise to "pad" the times
with a minute or two in the "play it safe" direction. E.g. Plag Mincha.
Better to finish Mincha a minute or two before the given time. But, better
to not light candles until a minute or two after the given time. Slight correction. More like a fine tuning. Last opportunity for Kiddush L'vana this month (in Israel) is THU Oct. 28, 8:00pm. Correct...except for someone who SAW the lunar eclipse in the wee hours of Thursday morning. AND knows its significance vis- a-vis K.L. It's a long story. Let's go for it. K.L. is said from the time of the month that the moon is MEI'IR LAARETZ, shines onto Earth (3 or 7 days after the molad - dispute - forget this part for now) until it is full (meaning, as long as it is waxing, i.e. growing - after full moon, the moon starts to wane, diminish). The halachic tradition is to use the "average" molad for the purpose of beginning and end of K.L. time (and for the announcement during Rosh Chodesh Benching) and not to use the actual (a.k.a. astronomical) molad and nigud (no moon & full moon). On average, the moon takes 29 days, 12 hours, 44 minutes and 1 cheilek to go through its cycle of phases. And the calculations we use for Rosh Chodesh Benching, for Kiddush L'vana, and for determining Rosh HaShana in our fixed calendar are based on this average. What it amounts to is starting with a given "molad of Creation" and adding 29d 12h 44m 1p (which is the same as 29d 12h 793p is one doesn't use minutes but rather divides an hour into 1080 parts - same thing) for every month that passes. Here's the wrinkle. The time it really
takes the moon to go through its cycle varies from month to month. This is
due to Kepler's second law of planetary motion (i.e. G-d's law of planetary
motion, discovered by Kepler), the masses of the Earth and Moon, and a few
other factors. Regardless of why it happens, it happens. Not so simple for the real, actual, astronomical molad. The actual molad of Tishrei was TUE 16:29 (Israel Standard Time). Cheshvan's was THU 04:48. That means a lunation of 29d 12h 19m. Close to average, but less. And with Kislev's new moon on a FRI 16:27, it will take the Moon only 29d 11h 39m to go through its phases. The difference between the actual time it takes the Moon to go through its cycle and 29d 12h 44m 1p can be several hours more or less. More to the point, the time of the molad (not just the duration from one until the next), varies between the average figure and the actual. At the moment, we are more interested in
the NIGUD, which is the midpoint between one molad and the next. Whatever
was said about MOLAD applies to NIGUD. The average NIGUD (deadline for K.L.)
is gotten by adding 14d 18h 22m (half of 29d 12h 44m) to the molad.
Cheshvan's molad (remember?) was THU 2h even. Adding 14 d 18h 22m brings us
to THU (Oct. 28) 20h 22m, which is just a little after 8:00pm on Thursday.
That was the time we listed as the last op for K.L. Some poskim hold that there is an exception to the above. And that brings us - after many words - to our point. A lunar eclipse occurs only at full moon. When one watches the eclipse AND knows that when the eclipse is over (even before) that full moon just took place, then he may NOT say K.L. after that time. Follow this. Knowledge that full moon actually took place (which a person can know easily every month) does not in and of itself preclude saying K.L. after the actual full moon time, but before the halachic deadline, of course. But EXPERIENCING the full moon does
prevent one from saying K.L. afterwards, even though it is before the
official halachic deadline. Miss the eclipse? See it and not know what it
means? Your K.L. deadline is 8:00pm THU. See and understand? KL only until
eclipse begins. The AKEIDA (binding of Yitzchak) is introduced by the words VAIHI ACHAR HAD' VARIM HA'EILEH... - usually translated as "And it came to pass after these things". Rashbam (R' Shimon b. Meir; grandson of Rashi, 4845-4934) states that this phrase indicates a connection between what just happened with what is about to happen. (This might seem obvious, but the Rashbam's view is that the connection is to the immediately previous event, and not just something that happened earlier.) Specifically, Rashbam points to the agreement between Avraham and Avimelech, whereby Avraham gave Avimelech, king of P'lishtim, some of the territory that G-d had promised to Avraham and his progeny... forever. This angered G-d (says Rashbam, based on a Midrash which will be detailed shortly) and He in essence was saying to Avraham, "You were so proud of having a son so that you could make an agreement with Avimelech that was for your children and grandchildren, now take your son and offer him as an Olah on Har HaMoriya and we'll see what good your agreement with Avimelech is." The Midrash mentioned earlier is based on the pasuk (Shmuel Alef 6:1), "And the Ark of G-d was in the fields of P'lishtim for seven months." G-d says to Avraham: You sealed your deal with Avimelech with seven sheep, by your life his children will wage seven wars against yours, and they will win. Another thing: By your life, his children will kill seven righteous ones among your children - Shimshon, Chofni, Pinchas, Sha'ul and his three sons. Another thing: By your life, your children will suffer seven destructions of the Mikdash - the Ohe lMoed, and in Gilgal, Nov, Shilo, Giv'on, and the two Batei Mikdash. And another thing: Because of the agreement sealed with the seven sheep, the Aron will be in S'dei P'lishtim for seven months. A very sharp Rashbam, taking Avraham
Avinu to task for agreeing to give some of Eretz Yisrael to someone else. He is sitting at the entrance of his tent (watching for travelers to welcome) in the heat of the day. SDT It was unnaturally hot; that was G-d's doing, to spare Avraham the bother of visitors, He removed the sun from its envelope... However, Avraham is distressed by the absence of visitors, so G-d sends three angels to him in the guise of wayfarers. This can teach us something about how to behave towards the elderly and infirm. Sometimes, we insist that they rest or tell them what "conventional wisdom" says is good or bad for them. "No, don't bother with that; I'll do it for you." "I turned up the heat for you." But each person is an individual. Calm, peaceful retirement works well for many older people. But not for everyone. Bed rest and taking things easy is a helpful formula for SOME recovering invalids. But not all. G-d, so to speak, first felt that Avraham needed rest; this would be the norm. But He then "realized" (so to speak) that in Avraham's case, his special activity of Hachnasat Orchim, hospitality, was a far better treatment for what ailed him, than resting. Avraham sees the three "men" and runs to greet them, after asking G-d to wait for him (so to speak). (From here we are taught the greatness of the mitzva of Hachnasat Orchim.) This is one of the ways to interpret the pasuk - that ADO-NAI means G-d, and that Avraham was addressing Him. ADONAI can also mean "my sirs", in which case Avraham could have been speaking to the men/angels. Each possibility causes minor awkwardness in the flow of the p'sukim. The word is considered holy (meaning the first opinion prevails), and Sofrim write it with the Kavana for G-d's name, but some say that one should use a conditional "sanctification". SDT "Speak little, but do much." This maxim from Pirkei Avot is manifest in Avraham Avinu's behavior. He offers the angels a bit of water and some bread, but in fact prepares for them (with the help of Sara and Yishmael) a sumptuous meal. The Mishna states that Avraham's meal for the strangers was proportionally greater than even the feast of Shlomo HaMelech in celebration of the building of the Beit HaMikdash. Avraham and Sarah are the ultimate models for hospitality, one of the hallmarks of the Jewish People. One of the angels informs Avraham of the pending birth of Yitzchak. Sara's reaction is to laugh (a slight doubt in the ability of a 100 year old to father a child and of a 90 year old woman to give birth). G-d asks Avraham why Sara would doubt His ability to permit an old woman to conceive. SDT Rabbi Yehuda says in the name of Rav
(in Bava M'tzi'a): What Avraham did for his guests by himself, G-d did for
the People of Israel by Himself; what Avraham did via another, G-d did
likewise. Avraham said: YUKACH NA M'AT MAYIM. Rashi explains the strange
grammatical form by saying that Avraham did not provide the water to the
strangers himself (it does not say K'CHU...) So too, when G-d was to provide
water to Avraham's descendants, He commanded Moshe Rabeinu to throw the
stick into the water, to strike the rock, to speak to the rock. But Avraham
fed the angels himself - "and I will get the bread, etc." When G-d needed to
feed thePeople,He provided us with Manna. Moshe did not bring it about. G-d
gave it straight to the People. The three angels each had a single task: One to heal Avraham, one to announce the birth of Yitzchak (both missions accomplished), the third to destroy S'dom. That angel is now accompanied by R'fael, whose new task is to save Lot and family. Avraham escorts the angels on their way to S'dom. SDT Once again, we learn the proper behavior of a host from Avraham: part of hospitality is to escort your guests as they leave your home. HaShem next tells Avraham of his intention to destroy S'dom. Avraham pleads and bargains on their behalf, but there aren't enough righteous people to save the cities. The dialog between Avraham and HaShem is an astounding (and unique) example of the close relationship between them. SDT Avraham's expression of humility
before G-d is "and I am dust and ash". Says the Gemara, because of Avraham's
humility, his children merited two mitzvot - the ash of the Para Aduma and
the dust of the Sota. Torah T'mima explains that the Para Aduma ash is the
epitome of spiritual purity (which can be thought of as the realm of
"between the Jew and G-d" mitzvot). The hopeful outcome of the Sota
procedure is Shalom Bayit, being a major example of interpersonal
relationships. Thus the reward for Avraham covers the whole range of Jewish
life. SDT The word "and he lingered" is read with the rare trup mark, the shalshelet, which musically emphasizes the reluctance of Lot to (believe what he was told by the angels and) leave. The same word is used in contrast to this behavior of Lot, in describing the haste with which the Children of Israel left Egypt at G-d's command, symbolized by the matza which they hastily baked rather than linger for the dough to rise and produce a "proper" bread demonstrating their faith and confidence in G-d. Interesting, is it not, that Lot is described as baking matzot for the visitors. Rashi's comment: It was Pesach. Lot is led out of the city by the angels,
his wife and two daughters with him. They are told to flee for their lives,
without looking back at the destruction of the cities. Lot pleads for
permission to seek refuge closer by. From the episode of Lot’s wife, we can draw the following point. Lot and family were worthy of being spared the destruction of S’dom, but they were not worthy enough to be able to witness the destruction. "And Avraham gets up early in the morning to the place where he STOOD before G-d." SDT Avraham returns to the same spot to speak to G-d. From here is derived the idea of having a MAKOM KAVUA, a fixed place for prayer. The Talmud says: "he who fixes himself a place for davening, the G-d of Avraham will help him". Of course, more fundamentally, it is this pasuk and another that combine to "support" the Gemara's statement that Avraham instituted T'filat Shacharit. That AMIDA, to stand before G-d, means to pray is learned from VAYA'AMOD PINCHAS VAY'PALEIL. And Pinchas stood in prayer (we can say) - T'hilim 106:30. The pasuk here in Vayeira links AMIDA with Avraham Avinu and with early in the morning, hence Shacharit. The Torah reiterates the point that Lot was saved in the merit of his uncle Avraham Avinu (and Ruth, the "mother of royalty" who was to come from Lot - G-d can work merit either from the past or the future). Lot's two daughters, having witnessed the total destruction of S'dom, assume that they are the sole survivors of mankind. They plot to get Lot drunk and sleep with him in order to continue humanity. Moav and Amon are the results. Ponder that everything that has happened so far in Parshat Vayeira, make up a single long, 71-pasuk parsha. From the arrival of the angels through the completion of the final task of those angels - the destruction of S'dom. Apparently, the different episodes all belong together more than one would initially think. [S> 20:1 (18)] Avraham and Sara now travel to G'rar where they again present themselves as brother and sister. Sara is taken to Avimelech, but G-d appears to him and warns him not to touch her. Avimelech confronts Avraham who explains that his fears were based on the lack of "Fear of G-d" in the place. Avraham then prays on behalf of Avimelech and his people who were stricken with a disease which rendered them temporarily sterile. From this point (21:1) to the end of Vayeira, is the Torah reading of both days of Rosh HaShana. [S> 21:1 (21)] G-d fulfills His promise and Sara becomes pregnant. She bears a son to Avraham in his advanced age, and he is called Yitzchak. Avraham circumcises Yitzchak at eight days of age, as G-d has commanded. Avraham's having prayed on behalf of
Avimelech for children is juxtaposed to Sara Imeinu conceiving. Our Sage
teach us that selflessly praying for others can sometimes result in the same
prayers being answered for yourself. Although the plain understanding of B'YOM HIGAMEIL ET YITZCHAK is "when Yitzchak was weaned" - Rashi says at 24 months of age, there is a REMEZ (hint/clue) in the word HIGAMEIL to a possible other explanation of the word. HEI+GIMMEL = 8 (days), MEM-LAMED, MAL, was circumcised. It can mean that the party in question was to celebrate Yitzchak's BRIT. As Yitzchak is growing up, Sara notices the potential negative influence of Yishmael and demands of Avraham that he send Yishmael and his mother, Hagar, away. Blinded by his great "kind heart", Avraham has to be told by G-d to listen to Sara. Hagar and Yishmael once again are on the verge of death in the wilderness, butYishmael's prayers are answered and they are saved. Hagar is assured by an angel that they will survive. And indeed they do, and Hagar subsequently marries Yishmael off to a woman from the land of Egypt. Both Hagar and Yishmael prayed to G-d
when Yishmael was dying. G-d heard "the lad's voice". Rashi says, from here
we learn that the strongest prayer offered on behalf of someone who is ill
are those of the sick person himself (if he is able to pray on his own
behalf). And, of course, others should pray on his behalf as well,
regardless of whether the person himself is able to daven.) Avraham plants an "Eshel" in Be'er Sheva.
In addition to being a type of tree, the word ESHEL is considered an acronym
of the Hebrew words for Food, Drink, and Lodgings (or Food, Sleeping,
Escort). ESHEL AVRAHAM is the symbol of hospitality for all times. Although none of Avraham's descendants (we, the Jewish People) can ever be tested in so drastic a way (because we have the experiences of our predecessors to give us strength), we do derive tremendous inspiration from this portion of the Torah. It is part of our Heritage and, even more, part of our Essence. Tests of Faith are relative to the individual. Each of us is challenged in different ways throughout our lives. This is also so for us as a Nation. May we be always guided by deep commitment to Torah and Jewish values. MORE. Akeidat Yitzchak is our identity
card. It define who we are... even when our own behavior is contradictory to
our Torah standards. We stand before G-d on Judgment Day - Rosh HaShana, and
we blow the Shofar made from a ram's horn. We ask G-d to remember Akeidat
Yitzchak and have mercy on His (sometimes undeserving) children. We read the
Akeida in the Torah and we refer to it repeatedly in our Rosh HaShana
davening and Slichot, to inspire us and to identify us. Maftir is the final five p'sukim. The haftara also tells of the Shunamite woman who prayed so fervently for a son. She had a son but he died. He is miraculously resuscitated by Elisha. This forms a counterpart to the birth of Yitzchak and the subsequent almost- losing him at the Akeida. (According to a Midrash, the angel did
not stop Avraham in time and Yitzchak died. There are prayers that refer to
Yitzchak's ashes. This makes the parallel between the sedra and haftara all
the stronger.) The owner entrusts the bailee with a barrel of wine that is set down in a special place in the bailee's wine cellar. The bailee tips the barrel without moving, lifting, or pulling it from its spot where it rested and removes a quart of wine. If the barrel breaks after the bailee takes the wine from the barrel, the bailee is not liable for the breakage, but is responsible to pay the owner for a quart of wine. Since he did not move or lift or pull the barrel from its spot he is not guilty of unauthorized use. The bailee is liable only for the part of the object that he actually took; the balance still belongs to the owner who bears the responsibility for all loss except for the negligence of the unpaid balance. However, if the balance of the wine in the barrel turns sour, the bailee is liable for the price of wine for the entire barrel. The wine would not have turned sour if the barrel was full. It was only because the barrel was opened and air came in that the balance of the wine soured. This may not apply to other types of beverage such as whiskeys or juices. The owner entrusts the bailee with a barrel of wine that is set down in a special place in the bailee's wine cellar. The bailee lifts the barrel to take a quart of wine. The bailee is liable for all loss that will thereafter occur to the barrel of wine even if he does not actually take the quart of wine. The bailee is liable since he lifted the object with the intent to cause some depreciation to the barrel of wine by taking some of the wine. At that moment he is liable for the entire object since he is now deemed to have robbed the wine from the owner. The bailee takes the entrusted barrel of wine not to drink from it or to use it and the bailee moves the barrel to a place other than where it is left. If the barrel was moved for the sake of the barrel, such as to keep it away from heat, and the barrel breaks while the bailee is handling it or afterward when it was returned to its place or a new place, the bailee has no liability; However, if he moves the barrel for his own purposes, such as to stand on it, the bailee is liable if the barrel breaks at any time. If he moves the barrel to get to the space on which the barrel stood, the bailee is liable if the barrel was then lost or damaged through his negligence but not if through force majeure. Acts constituting unauthorized use of
money The owner entrusted money with a money changer or a shopkeeper or a person who lends money on interest. This refers to a person who lends money to a non-Jew. If it is contained in a purse that is not sealed nor tied with a peculiar knot, the bailee is permitted to use the money. It is known by all that money lenders, moneylenders on interest, and shopkeepers are always looking to borrow money. He is permitted to use the money since it is assumed that if the owner did not want the money changer or shopkeeper to use the money, he would have tied the money up in a peculiar manner. Since the bailee may use the money, he has the status of a paid bailee regarding the money even before he actually uses the money. If the owner demands the money back, the bailee may give him other money in an equal amount. If the money was lost or stolen or lost or damaged because of the negligence of the bailee, he is liable to the owner; he is not liable if the money was lost through force majeure. Once the bailee uses the money he has the status of a borrower and is liable under all circumstances. This last law holds true even if the bailee restored the money to the purse, he is liable as a borrower until he restores the money to the owner. All of the profits made by the bailee belong to the bailee. If the bailee does share the profits with the owner, it is not considered interest to the owner. When the owner makes a demand for the return of the money and tells the bailee that he needs the money to invest it and the bailee does not give the money back to the owner, the bailee is liable for the loss of profits that the owner sustained by not having the money returned to him. The bailee may tell the owner that the money is invested and if the bailee wants to participate in the investment, for loss or for gain, the owner may agree or may wait until the bailee completes his investment. If the bailee advises people that he has invested the money for the owner and if there is a profit, such profits belong to the owner. If the money was entrusted to the money changer or shopkeeper or a money lender on interest, and the money is contained in a purse that is sealed or tied in a peculiar way, the bailee is not permitted to use the money. If therefore the money was lost through his negligence, he is liable; if lost or stolen or lost through force majeure, he is not liable. The owner entrusted a bailee who is not a money lender, a lender on interest, or a shopkeeper with a purse of money. The bailee may not use the money. Therefore the unpaid bailee, if he placed the money in a suitable secure place, is not liable for any loss unless there was a loss due to the negligence of the bailee. The non-money- lender bailee lifted the purse to take out one coin or other money a part of the object that is not attached to the other part of the object. The majority view is that the bailee assumes full liability for the entire purse and contents of the money if they are later lost or stolen or lost through force majeure.There is a strong dissent that holds that there is some doubt as to the accuracy of the majority holding: perhaps the bailee is liable only for the money that he took from the purse or perhaps he is liable for the entire purse. The subject matter of this lesson is more
fully discussed in volume VIII chapters 292 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 Last week we added that fair dealing is an essential element in this process, since it enables humanity to clarify and discern the qualities of the object and help it find the person who is most in need of it, or to look at it the other way, the person that this object needs to fulfill its role in Providence. But mere verbal agreement is not enough; we interpreted this to mean that in order to fully realize the potential for holiness in our property, we require a sense of attachment and commitment which is cemented by a symbolic act of kinyan (acquisition). This week we discuss the laws of acquisition through money. According to Torah law, giving money effects an acquisition, but the Rabbis decreed that even after money has changed hands the sides are allowed to renege (SA CM 199). They were worried that when the seller is still in physical possession of the merchandise but is no longer owner (because he received the money) that he might take improper care of the object. But reneging on such a sale is considered a serious breach of faith – much more serious than going back on a verbal agreement. (CM 204). In order to present Rav Natan’s explanation, we will briefly introduce a common theme in the writings of Rav Natan’s master, Rav Nachman of Breslav. Rav Nachman emphasizes the mystical significance of possessions; in a number of places he writes that richness (ashirut) is the “root” of the soul. My understanding of this statement is that the essence of the creation is that the human soul is formed with a potential for the appreciation of Divine beneficence specifically as something that comes from beyond itself. Thus the human being is something separate from G^d, but is able to attain fulfillment only by reaching out to G^d and by experiencing contentment from His goodness, including through bodily and emotional enjoyments. Rav Nachman also writes that money itself is an offshoot of this supernal root. Money does not embody any specific worldly enjoyment, but rather embodies an abstract power of obtaining worldly goods. We have pointed out before that having money places a person on a higher level in the chain of Providence, since he has anaugmented ability to emulate the Creator by channeling possessions towards their ideal recipients. In Rav Nachman’s writings the main vehicle for this exercise of providence is charity; another one frequently mentioned is integrity in business dealings. Thus money is at a high spiritual level, as we read “Mine is thesilver and Mine is the gold, thus the word of HaShem of Hosts” (Chagai 2:8). However, this abstract power of money is “leveraged”. Just as any specific bodily pleasure can elevate us by giving us an appreciation of HaShem’s goodness or alternatively debase us by reducing our concern to our bodies rather than our spirits, so the abstract power of money can be supernal or infernal. Rav Nachman explains that it can turn into paganism, and indeed writes that the acquisitive urge is the root of pagan worship, pointing out that the Scripture often refers to idols as “silver and gold”. (See for example Devarim 29:16.) Now we can complete the presentation of
Rav Natan’s explanation. We began by stating that an acquisition is
finalized when one side has attached himself to his acquisition in a way
that will enable him to use it in G^d’s service. For instance, he may lift
the object up to show his attachment to it and his commitment to elevate it.
Obtaining money gives the person an even greater power to elevate nature,
because of money’s supernal root. Thus giving money should finalize a
transaction. Please note: The manuscript for Meaning in Mitzvot on the Kitzur Shulchan Arukh is in its final stages of preparation. The book will be distributed IY"H by Feldheim. There still might be an opportunity for anyone who would like to make a dedication or otherwise be a partner in the publication of the first printing of the book. Please contact Rabbi Meir by e-mail: mail@asherandattara.com Rabbi Meir authors a popular weekly
on-line Q&A column, "The Jewish Ethicist", which gives Jewish guidance on
everyday ethical dilemmas in the workplace. The column is a joint project of
the JCT Center for Business Ethics, Jerusalem College of Technology - Machon
Lev; and Aish HaTorah. You can see the Jewish Ethicist, and submit your own
Qs — www.jewishethicist.com or www. aish.com The Admor of Kotsk taught that just as we pay an artisan for the preparation of his equipment and the honing of his skill in addition to the actual work done, so too, the mitzvot require not only fulfillment but also forethought and diligent preparation. All spiritual and religious acts require preparation and thought if they are to be sincere, pure, and have meaning beyond ritual. The very first Pesach that Israel observed in its own land was preceded by the miraculous crossing of the Jordan but also by the act of circumcision of all the males born during the 40 years in the wilderness. Since the result of transgressing the laws of chametz and matzo are so serious and the details inherent in the Chag so intricate and many, our Sages taught; “A month before [that is, immediately after Purim], we start to teach the dinim of Chag HaPesach”; on the seder night itself the obligation is to tell and experience the actual Exodus itself. So too, the Pesach of Chizkiyahu was preceded by the reanctification and rededication of the Beit HaMikdash. In the very first year of Chizkiyahu’s reign, the king called on the Levites to rid the Mikdash of all the Tum'ah and Nidah with which Ahaz his father had filled it and to cast them into Nahal Kidron that lies east of the city, even as Asa had done before. This call included the Kohanim but was meant to exclude the ordinary people who had usurped their calling in order to officiate at the various Bamot. At the same time, they were to rid the city and the country of the altars to the many idols and asherot that the people of Judah had erected. Likewise they rectified all the changes in the physical conditions of the Temple that Ahaz had made.In addition, for many years, the people of Judah instead of lighting the Menorah, offering the incense, and sacrificing the daily obligatory offering [the olah] to HaShem, had used them in idol worship. Now, after relating the evil Judah had done to the consequent suffering and defeats at the hands of their enemies, the king prayed that their present actions would be: “A covenant between us and HaShem and He will turn from His anger with us” (29:10). The work was started in the first month, i.e. Nissan, and that is not without significance. To make Nissan Rosh Chodashim is the first mitzva we were given (Sh'mot 12:2), that according to some is the day of the Creation, on that date Moshe erected the Mishkan (Sh'mot 40:17), the Nesiim commenced bringing their sacrifices, Aharon HaKohen began to officiate instead of the firstborn, then was given the commandment of the Birkat Kohanim, the sacrifices at the bamot were henceforth forbidden, etc. (Shabbat 67b). The Kohanim purified the inner courtyard that was out of bounds even to the Levites, while the latter dealt with the outer courtyards and removed the altars to avoda zara erected there. It is significant that many names of both of them recall the names from the Torah and from earlier books of the Tanach; for example- Kehat,Merari, Gershoni, Amashi, Elkana Kish, Bnei Asaf etc. Chizkiyahu refers to the Temple as the Mishkan of HaShem and indeed the rededication and consecration that he ordered, compares in many respects to the Chanukat HaMishkan in the desert by Moshe. First there was the cleansing and purifying of the desecrated Temple. Then, just as there had been eight days sanctification at the erecting of the Mishkan, so too now the Kohanim started the sanctification of the Temple on the eighth of Nissan and completed it on the 16th. When the purification was complete, the king and the people laid their hands in confession on the Chatat and then the Kohanim offered Olot and Zevachim in gratitude, as they had done in the wilderness The trumpets were sounded by the Kohanim as required with all sacrifices (Bamidbar 10:16) and the musical instruments that David had prepared on the instructions of the prophets Gad and Natan, were played by the Leviyim while they sung praises; according to their order as he had arranged aspart of his preparations for the building of the Beit HaMikdash. It should be noted that the singing of the Levites is a separate mitzva and is required for the Avoda. “ It is a positive mitzva for the Leviyim to sing while the korbanot are offered [the absence of their songs invalidates the Avoda (Yerushalmi Pesachim 4:2). They and the Israelites accompany the offerings with their musical instruments (Rambam, Klei HaMikdash 3:3). “The burnt offerings were in abundance….
the peace offerings and the libations… So the Avoda of the House for the
Lord was firmly established. And Chizkiyahu and all the people rejoiced
because of that which G-d had prepared… ” (29:35-36). Q I want to remove the mezuza from a doorpost to replace it with a more beautiful mezuza. When I do so, should I make a new beracha upon affixing it? A First, let’s make sure we are talking about the same thing. If you want to put the same scroll in a new, more beautiful case, then you do not make a new beracha. (If you “inherited” the mezuza from a previous resident, see below). The mitzva has not been changed significantly, as the mitzva relates to the mezuza scroll alone. The short break in time is not a factor in a case where one takes it off with the expectation to return it imminently. If you take the opportunity to check the mezuza before reaffixing it (not a bad idea, as it should be checked twice in seven years) then it is a more complicated question (see Ask the Rabbi, LechLecha 5764). Regarding switching the mezuza itself, we do not have early sources on the matter, and the Acharonim expend much energy to find the closest precedent. The Rosh (Tzitzit 20) implies that if one switches garments, each of which is obligated in tzitzit, he makes a beracha when putting on the new one. Is switching mezuzot comparable? There is a difference, as there is a break in the obligation to have tzitzit while no four-cornered garment is on him, and a new obligation is created when he puts on the new garment. In contrast, by mezuza, the house generates a continuous obligation of mezuza, so a new beracha might not be in place. According to most authorities (see Kaf Hachayim 25:79; Yabia Omer III, YD 17) if one removes a pair of tefillin to replace it immediately with another, he makes a new beracha. This is more similar, in that the fulfillment of the same obligation continues with a different object, and we see that one makes a new beracha.However, this too may not be exactly analogous, as many are of the opinion that there is not a continuous mitzva to wear tefillin all day, as there certainly is for a mezuza to be on the wall. Therefore, it is less clear that continuing the mitzva of mezuza with a different scroll is a new enough fulfillment of the mitzva to require a new beracha. Nevertheless, the Maharam Shick (YD 285) says that, assuming one did not have in mind for the second mezuza while putting on the first (here, the second one may not even have been written when the first was affixed) the earlier beracha does not cover this mezuza, and one needs a new beracha. Although some argue, Chovat HaDar (11:14) follows this opinion and Yabia Omer (ibid.) leans toward it. (The latter suggests strengthening the need for a beracha as follows. If one waits a few hours between removing one and affixing the other, there is enough hesech hada’at to require a beracha even according the dissenting opinions(see Ben Ish Chai II, Ki Tavo 8)). If a previous resident affixed the first mezuza, then he who affixes one now was not involved in the beracha and should make one now even if he removes and returns the same mezuza (Har Tzvi, YD 287). There is another issue to consider. The gemara rules that it is permitted to remove tzitzit from one garment in order to put them on another (Shabbat 22a), but the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 15:1) says that it is forbidden if one does not plan to put the tzitzit on another garment. The issue is of disgracing an article used for a mitzva by taking it out of use. Since Rishonim (including Tosafot, Shabbat ibid.) equate removing a mezuza to removing tzitzit, it is problematic to replace a mezuza without sufficient justification. There are significant opinions that if one does so in order to replace the mitzva object with a more beautiful one it is permitted (see Mishna Berura 15:3 and Har Tzvi, ibid.). However, it may be best to switch the mezuzot when one promptly affixes the removed mezuza in a place that needs one (Torah Lishma 244). This works only if the second doorway requires a mezuza on the same level as the first (sometimes the need for a mezuza is rabbinic or even just a stringency) (Chovat Hadar 1:9). 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 One day, as he was home, the older brother heard chopping outside his house. He opened the door and saw a laborer demolishing the threshhold, as the Rav stood by supervising the work. "From now on", the rabbi said with a
smile, "your vow is null and void, and your brother can enter your house." As a young man, Avraham arduously searched for the Almighty. When he was convinced of God's existence, he wanted to share his hard-earned discovery with his contemporaries who had been led astray by idolatrous images and figures. He engaged them in debate, declared that their lifestyle was founded on errors and became an iconoclast, orchestrating the destruction of his father's idols. So intellectually overpowering was Avraham that the reigning potentate, Nimrod, attempted to kill him. In Ur Kasdim, he didn't build altars or produce disciples. The first stage, fraught with danger and tension, ends with a fugitive Avraham escaping to Charan. In Charan, Avraham became an itinerant preacher and lecturer, wandering from place to place and traversing a significant portion of the civilized world. He built altars either as a locus for prayer or as a forum to articulate his ideas. The third most illustrious stage took place in Eretz Canaan. There he planted an Eishel which epitomized Avraham as the quintessence of Chesed. Here he became the teacher par excellence who is an exemplar of Chesed while simultaneously dialoguing with his contemporaries, sensitive to each individual. Rambam describes how Avraham wined and dined his sought after guests. These characteristic acts of Chesed deeply effected the hearts and minds of listeners, generating thousands of adherents and devotees. This third methodology was eminently successful. In his sojourns, Avraham had
metamorphosed from a young iconoclast, to an itinerant preacher and finally
in Eretz Yisroel to a model of Chesed. Avraham had embarked on a journey of
self discovery. His odyssey reached its climax when the 'Brit of Chesed'
became his overriding guideline. Therefore the Torah only briefly and
cryptically alludes to the first two stages of his career; the ultimate
stage, a life of Chesed, was only realized in the land that Hashem had
promised him. Rabbi Avishai David, Beit Shemesh; TORAH
THOUGHTS as contributed by Aloh Naaleh members for publication in the
Orthodox Union's 'Torah Insights', a weekly Torah publication on Parshat
Ha'Shavuah Although Avraham was not commanded to slay his son, our rabbis concur that this step was a natural corollary to the Divine command to “bring him [Isaac] up there as an offering upon one of the mountains” (Bereishit 22:2). With that thought in mind, one of the most striking elements of this episode appears to be Yitzhak’s declaration: “But where is the lamb for the offering?” For Rashi and Rambam the Akeida was the last of ten tests to which Avraham was subjected. It is clear, insofar as Avraham represents the archetype of the Jew, that our determination to serve G-d under the most demanding of circumstances is similarly being tested today. And as we can in no way rationalize that Yitzhak deserved to die, so we find it difficult to comprehend the sacrifices being made in our times. Pirkei D’Rabbi Eliezer describes how the
tears of the angels fell into Yitzchak’s eyes at the moment of truth. And as
we lie on the altar today, perhaps it is appropriate to echo the angels’
plea to G-d: “Lo! The knife is at his throat. How long will you wait?” The Structure of a "Rainwater" Mikvah The Mikvah immersion pool is always constructed in close proximity to the Otzar HaMayim. The minimum size of a Mikvah immersion pool is one Amah square and three Amot deep (Chagiga 11a, et al) but it could be and usually is considerably larger since it has to be deep enough to enable the water to cover the entire body of the person immersing. When the water stands in the Otzar HaMayim, silt and other impurities sinks to the bottom leaving clean water; only pure water flows into the Mikvah immersion pool. The minimum diameter of the slanting connecting pipe which permitted water to flow from the Otzar HaMayim to the Mikvah immersion pool of conduit is one Tefach (approx. 5cm), although these pipes are also usually larger. In building a valid Mikvah, the intent of the construction workers is crucial. The Mikvah has to be built with the intention that it is to be used as a Mikvah - for purification - and not merely as a bath or hygienic purposes. The Otzar HaMayim, the Mikvah immersion pool, and the connecting pipes may not be made of material which is susceptible to ritual impurity such as metal. The accouterments of the Mikva'ot of the Mikdash were constructed of stone or concrete which were not subject to ritual impurity. Similar Mikva'ot from the Mikdash era have been recently excavated in the "houses of the Kohanim" in the "Upper City (a.k.a. the "Jewish Quarter") and under Yeshivat HaKotel. (There are two methods in building a Mikvah, which vary in some particulars. The method described and pictured above is called Hashaka ("touching"). The other method is called Zeri'a ("seeding") which is beyond the scope of this column. Both methods have been used over the centuries and the Rishonim are divided in their preferences. Rambam and the Ra'avad prefer Hashaka. Rashi, Rabbeinu Tam, Rosh, Tur, Ramban and Rashba maintain that "Zeri'a" is preferable. In choosing Hashaka over Zeri'a to illustrate the basic principles of Mikvah construction, we make no pretense of deciding practical Halacha.When lions contend, let the field mice beware! And truthfully it is difficult to say which method was used in the construction of the Mikva'ot of the Mikdash. In Israel today, most Mikva'ot - except for Chabad's - are now built using two Otzrot HaMayim - thus allowing a combination of both methods.) Periodically, the Otzar HaMayim and the Mikvah immersion pool have to be be cleaned. The water is totally removed and the interior of both structures thoroughly dried. Once dried and cleaned, the Otzar HaMayim is again filled with 40 Se'ah of "natural" water and then "ordinary" water added. The water level rises until water spills through the connecting conduit and refills the Mikvah immersion pool. <to be continued> Catriel is in the process of writing a
book: The Temple of Jerusalem, A Pilgrims Prospective; A Guided Tour through
the Temple and the Divine Service Buy Tefila L'Chayalei Tzahal cards (for
yourself, family, and friends) for 5NIS each Proceeds benefit injured and
needy soldiers. Cards available at the Israel Center - front desk LUNCH? When a tiyul says “bring your own
lunch”, you can order one 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 Vayeira Homepage]
|
